CVE-2024-49128
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 · uneditedSensitive data storage in improperly locked memory in Windows Remote Desktop Services allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
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 confidenceA vulnerability in Windows Remote Desktop Services allows sensitive data to be stored in improperly locked memory, enabling an unauthorized remote attacker to execute arbitrary code over a network. The flaw stems from insufficient memory protection mechanisms that fail to properly secure sensitive data structures.
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 versions= r2< 10.0.14393.7606< 10.0.17763.6659< 10.0.20348.2966< 10.0.25398.1308< 10.0.26100.2605CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Identify Windows Server version and build numberRun 'winver' or 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name" /C:"OS Version"' to display the installed Windows Server version and build numberAffected if The displayed build number falls within an affected range: Server 2016 < 10.0.14393.7606, Server 2019 < 10.0.17763.6659, Server 2022 < 10.0.20348.2966, Server 2022 23h2 < 10.0.25398.1308, Server 2025 < 10.0.26100.2605, or Server 2012 (any version)
-
Verify Remote Desktop Services is enabledOpen Services (services.msc) and check if 'Remote Desktop Services' (TermService) is running, or run 'reg query HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server /v fDenyTSConnections' to check the RDP enablement registry valueAffected if The registry value fDenyTSConnections is 0 (RDP enabled) or the TermService service is running
-
Check RDP listener configurationRun 'netsh advfirewall firewall show rule name=all' or check Event Viewer for RDP listener events under Microsoft-Windows-TerminalServices-RDPClient/OperationalAffected if RDP listeners are configured and active on the system
A system is affected if it runs a vulnerable Windows Server version (below the fixed build) AND has Remote Desktop Services enabled and listening.
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.
dbcve · scoped10.0.14393.760610.0.17763.665910.0.20348.2966
Apply the Microsoft security update for CVE-2024-49128 when available. In the interim, restrict RDP access via network-level controls (VPN, firewall rules), disable RDP if not required, and enforce Network Level Authentication (NLA).
Windows Server 2016: build 10.0.14393.7606+ | Windows Server 2019: build 10.0.17763.6659+ | Windows Server 2022: build 10.0.20348.2966+ | Windows Server 2022 23h2: build 10.0.25398.1308+ | Windows Server 2025: build 10.0.26100.2605+ | Windows Server 2012/2012 R2: migrate to supported version
- Identify the current Windows Server build version by running 'winver' or 'systeminfo' in Command Prompt
- For Windows Server 2016: Update to build 10.0.14393.7606 or later via Windows Update or manually download the security update from Microsoft Update Catalog
- For Windows Server 2019: Update to build 10.0.17763.6659 or later via Windows Update or manually download the security update from Microsoft Update Catalog
- For Windows Server 2022: Update to build 10.0.20348.2966 or later via Windows Update
- For Windows Server 2022 23h2: Update to build 10.0.25398.1308 or later via Windows Update
- For Windows Server 2025: Update to build 10.0.26100.2605 or later via Windows Update
- For Windows Server 2012/2012 R2: Microsoft no longer supports these versions; migrate to a supported Windows Server version (recommended: Windows Server 2022 or 2025)
- After updating, verify the build version matches or exceeds the fixed build for your version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-49128 — 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-2024-49128 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