CVE-2013-0078
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe Microsoft Antimalware Client in Windows Defender on Windows 8 and Windows RT uses an incorrect pathname for MsMpEng.exe, which allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted application, aka "Microsoft Antimalware Improper Pathname Vulnerability."
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceWindows Defender's antimalware service (MsMpEng.exe) on Windows 8 and Windows RT uses an incorrect pathname for its executable, allowing a local authenticated attacker to place a malicious executable in the misidentified path and execute it with elevated privileges, achieving local privilege escalation.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check Windows versionRun 'winver' or 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name"' to confirm the Windows version. This vulnerability only affects Windows 8 and Windows RT.Affected if The system is running Windows 8 or Windows RT (any edition).
-
Verify Windows Defender is installedCheck for the presence of Windows Defender by looking for the service: run 'sc query WinDefend' or check for the executable at C:\Program Files\Windows Defender\MsMpEng.exeAffected if Windows Defender service exists on the system.
-
Examine the Windows Defender service configurationRun 'sc qc WinDefend' to query the service configuration and examine the BINARY_PATH_NAME field showing the executable path.Affected if The service path differs from the expected 'C:\Program Files\Windows Defender\MsMpEng.exe' or points to an unexpected location.
-
Inspect the vulnerable misidentified pathCheck if an executable exists at the path referenced in the service configuration (the incorrect path used by the vulnerable service). Compare this to the actual Windows Defender installation directory.Affected if A different or unexpected path is configured for the MsMpEng.exe service executable than the standard Windows Defender installation path.
The system is affected if it runs Windows 8 or Windows RT with Windows Defender installed, and the service executable path points to a location other than the standard Windows Defender directory, indicating the pathname misconfiguration vulnerability is present.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the Microsoft security update for CVE-2013-0078 via Windows Update or manually download the patch from Microsoft Update Catalog to correct the pathname handling in Windows Defender's service configuration.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0078 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-0078 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data