CVE-2025-48817
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 · uneditedRelative path traversal in Remote Desktop Client 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 relative path traversal vulnerability exists in a Remote Desktop Client where insufficient input validation on file path parameters allows an attacker to use '../' sequences or similar techniques to access files outside the intended directory. This can lead to arbitrary code execution when the attacker can inject malicious code into accessible locations that are subsequently executed by the client.
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 data< 1.2.6353< 2.0.559.0< 10.0.10240.21073< 10.0.14393.8246< 10.0.17763.7558< 10.0.19044.6093< 10.0.19045.6093< 10.0.22621.5624CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 installed Remote Desktop Client versionOpen Control Panel > Programs and Features, look for 'Remote Desktop' or 'Microsoft Remote Desktop' in the installed programs list, or check the client's About/Version information typically found in the app menuAffected if The installed version is lower than 1.2.6353
-
Identify Microsoft Windows App versionOpen Settings > Apps > Installed Apps, search for 'Windows App' or 'Microsoft Windows App', click on it and view the version informationAffected if The installed version is lower than 2.0.559.0
-
Check Windows 10 build numberOpen Command Prompt or PowerShell and run 'winver' or 'systeminfo | findstr /B /C:"OS Name" /C:"OS Version"', or go to Settings > System > About to view the Windows specificationAffected if Running Windows 10 1507 (build < 10.0.10240.21073), Windows 10 1607 (build < 10.0.14393.8246), Windows 10 1809 (build < 10.0.17763.7558), Windows 10 21h2 (build < 10.0.19044.6093), or Windows 10 22h2 (build < 10.0.19045.6093)
-
Check Windows 11 build numberOpen Command Prompt or PowerShell and run 'winver' or check Settings > System > About to view the Windows specificationAffected if Running Windows 11 22h2 with build lower than 10.0.22621.5624
You are affected if you have Microsoft Remote Desktop Client < 1.2.6353, Microsoft Windows App < 2.0.559.0, or any of the listed Windows 10/11 versions with builds below the specified thresholds and the Remote Desktop Client feature is in use.
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 · scoped1.2.63532.0.559.010.0.10240.21073
Apply vendor-provided patches immediately. Implement strict input validation on all file path parameters to canonicalize paths and reject sequences that traverse outside allowed directories. Network-level segmentation can limit exposure to untrusted RDP servers.
Remote Desktop Client >= 1.2.6353, Windows App >= 2.0.559.0, or respective Windows version-specific builds as listed above
- Identify the affected product(s) in your environment from: Remote Desktop Client, Windows App, or specific Windows 10/11 versions
- For Remote Desktop Client: Update to version 1.2.6353 or later
- For Windows App: Update to version 2.0.559.0 or later
- For Windows 10 1507: Update to build 10.0.10240.21073 or later
- For Windows 10 1607: Update to build 10.0.14393.8246 or later
- For Windows 10 1809: Update to build 10.0.17763.7558 or later
- For Windows 10 21h2: Update to build 10.0.19044.6093 or later
- For Windows 10 22h2: Update to build 10.0.19045.6093 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-48817 — 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-2025-48817 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