Uncontrolled Search Path (DLL Hijack)Weakness · CWE-427

CVE-2025-13152

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-12-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
Zero-click

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 · unedited
A potential DLL hijacking vulnerability was reported in Lenovo One Client during an internal security assessment that could allow a local authenticated user to execute code with elevated privileges.

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 confidence

Lenovo One Client is vulnerable to DLL hijacking, where the application loads Dynamic Link Libraries from locations controllable by an untrusted user. A local authenticated attacker can place a malicious DLL in the search path, which the application will load and execute with elevated privileges, achieving local privilege escalation.

MitigationImplement secure DLL loading by specifying full absolute paths for all DLL dependencies, enabling SafeDllSearchMode, and validating DLL signatures before loading. Conduct a comprehensive audit of all DLL load operations in the application.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify Lenovo One Client installation
    Check for Lenovo One Client in installed programs (Windows: Registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall orPrograms and Features); look for executable in Program Files or AppData folders
    Affected if Lenovo One Client is present on the system
  2. Identify installed version
    Right-click the Lenovo One Client executable (commonly in C:\Program Files\Lenovo\One Client or similar), select Properties, and check the File Version field; alternatively, use PowerShell: Get-Item 'C:\Program Files\Lenovo\One Client\*.exe' | Select-Object Name, VersionInfo
    Affected if Version cannot be determined or matches the affected release line
  3. Determine DLL search order
    Use Process Monitor or similar tool to capture DLL load events when Lenovo One Client starts; filter by Process Name containing 'OneClient' and look for Load Image events showing DLL paths
    Affected if Application loads DLLs from user-writable directories in the search path
  4. Check directory permissions on DLL load locations
    Right-click each directory identified in the DLL search path (such as application directory, System32, Windows, current working directory), select Properties > Security, and verify if Users or Authenticated Users have Write or Modify permissions
    Affected if Low-privilege authenticated users can write to any directory in the DLL search path
  5. Identify replaceable DLLs
    Review the DLLs loaded by Lenovo One Client from the Process Monitor trace; check if any non-system DLLs (especially those in application directory or user-writable paths) can be replaced by an untrusted user
    Affected if Any DLL loaded from a user-writable location exists in the application's search path

A user is affected if Lenovo One Client is installed and any directory in its DLL search path is writable by authenticated low-privilege users, allowing DLL hijacking for privilege escalation.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement secure DLL loading by specifying full absolute paths for all DLL dependencies, enabling SafeDllSearchMode, and validating DLL signatures before loading. Conduct a comprehensive audit of all DLL load operations in the application.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-13152 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-13152 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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