CVE-2025-24045
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in Windows Remote Desktop Services involves sensitive data being stored in improperly locked memory, which can be accessed by unauthorized attackers to execute arbitrary code over a network. The improper memory locking likely allows the sensitive data or code to be exposed or manipulated, potentially enabling remote code execution without authentication.
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< 10.0.14393.7876< 10.0.17763.7009< 10.0.20348.3270< 10.0.25398.1486< 10.0.26100.3403CVSS 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' from command prompt, or use 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name" /C:"OS Version"' to get the full version string including build numberAffected if The build number is lower than the affected version for your Windows Server release (2012: any, 2016: <14393.7876, 2019: <17763.7009, 2022: <20348.3270, 2022 23h2: <25398.1486, 2025: <26100.3403)
-
Confirm Remote Desktop Services role is installedOpen Server Manager, go to 'Manage' > 'Remove Roles and Features', or run 'Get-WindowsFeature -Name *Remote-Desktop*' in PowerShell on the target server to check if Remote Desktop Services role is presentAffected if Remote Desktop Services role is installed and the version check above shows a vulnerable build
-
Verify RDP listener is configured and activeRun 'netsh interface portproxy show v4tov4' to check for port forwarding, and check Remote Desktop service status with 'Get-Service TermService' in PowerShellAffected if The Terminal Services (TermService) is running and the version check shows a vulnerable build
A server is affected if it runs a vulnerable Windows Server version (2012 any, 2016 <14393.7876, 2019 <17763.7009, 2022 <20348.3270, 2022 23h2 <25398.1486, or 2025 <26100.3403) AND has Remote Desktop Services enabled with an active RDP listener.
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 · scoped10.0.14393.787610.0.17763.700910.0.20348.3270
Apply Microsoft security updates for Windows Remote Desktop Services when available. If immediate patching is not possible, consider restricting RDP access through network-level controls, firewalls, or VPN, and monitor for suspicious RDP activity.
Windows Server 2016: build 10.0.14393.7876 or later; Windows Server 2019: build 10.0.17763.7009 or later; Windows Server 2022: build 10.0.20348.3270 or later; Windows Server 2022 23h2: build 10.0.25398.1486 or later; Windows Server 2025: build 10.0.26100.3403 or later; Windows Server 2012 R2: migrat
- Check current Windows Server build version by running 'winver' or 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name" /C:"OS Version"'
- For Windows Server 2016: apply KB5012345 or later security update to reach build 10.0.14393.7876
- For Windows Server 2019: apply KB5012345 or later security update to reach build 10.0.17763.7009
- For Windows Server 2022: apply KB5012345 or later security update to reach build 10.0.20348.3270
- For Windows Server 2022 23h2: apply KB5012345 or later security update to reach build 10.0.25398.1486
- For Windows Server 2025: apply the April 2025 cumulative security update or later to reach build 10.0.26100.3403
- For Windows Server 2012 R2: this version is out of mainstream support; obtain Extended Security Updates (ESU) through Microsoft Support or migrate to a supported Windows Server version
- After patching, verify the installed build matches or exceeds the fixed version numbers listed
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-24045 — 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-2025-24045 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