CVE-2026-62695
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 · uneditedHeap-based buffer overflow in Windows Storage allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges locally.
In the news
Third-party coverageSurfaced from public web coverage — external links open in a new tab.
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 analysisData overflows a buffer allocated on the heap, corrupting neighbouring heap structures and allocator metadata that a patient attacker can groom into control of execution. It is subtler than a stack overflow but just as dangerous. The fix is validating lengths before every write and using safe allocators and bounded operations.
General guidance for the heap-based buffer overflow class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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< 10.0.22631.7517< 10.0.26100.9106< 10.0.26200.9106< 10.0.28000.2704< 10.0.20348.5440< 10.0.26100.33222CVSS 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
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 data10.0.20348.544010.0.22631.751710.0.26100.9106
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-62695 — 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 sourcesThis CVE presents as a local privilege escalation via heap overflow in Windows Storage, rated CVSS 7.8 with an 'authorized attacker' qualifier. That framing is the first thing to interrogate. In practice, any standard user account on a Windows endpoint can interact with the Storage subsystem — this is not a privileged role, it's the baseline capability required for normal operation. The 'authorized attacker' language implies a meaningful security boundary, but on enterprise machines, dozens of accounts typically meet this threshold. Your threat model should treat this as a near-trivial exploitation requirement, not a meaningful constraint. The more consequential analytical finding is that a heap-based buffer overflow persists in a core OS component that has been under continuous scrutiny for decades. This points to either legacy technical debt that escaped modern audit or a bounds-checking failure in code handling newer storage features. Either scenario indicates a process gap — either security review isn't reaching maintained legacy code, or developers working on storage paths lack adequate tooling or training. What should change your prioritization: the CVSS 7.8 rating treats this as a local-access vulnerability, but the blast radius extends well beyond gaining SYSTEM privileges. Storage interfaces with BitLocker volume mounting, Hyper-V virtual disk staging, container runtime overlays, and Windows Recovery Environment. A standard user who corrupts Storage state may not merely become administrator — they may escape VM boundaries, bypass disk encryption, or poison recovery paths that execute before malware protection loads. On domain-joined machines, post-exploitation lateral movement (lsass dumping, credential relay) begins immediately after SYSTEM access is obtained. Audit your environment for three conditions: whether standard users can invoke Storage APIs directly (they can by design), whether your patch prioritization treats CVSS 7.8 as non-urgent (it likely does), and whether any endpoint has more than a handful of provisioned accounts with valid tokens. The exploitation bar is functionally zero, and the post-exploitation chain is devastating. Treat this as a high-priority internal exposure regardless of how the CVSS vector reads.
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-62695 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