VulnerabilityPublished 11 Feb 2024Updated 30 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-25728: ExpressVPN · Insecure Storage of Sensitive Information

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High · fixed in 12.73.0 : patch affected systems soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 51% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 12.73.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Feb 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-25728, users and organizations should immediately update ExpressVPN clients on Windows to version 12.73.0 or later, where the issue is resolved. Administrators should audit VPN configurations to verify that split tunneling is used cautiously and that DNS requests are properly routed through the VPN DNS servers rather than the system DNS. If split tunneling is not essential, consider disabling it to ensure all traffic, including DNS, is routed through the VPN tunnel. Network monitoring tools can be employed to detect DNS requests leaking outside the VPN tunnel. Additionally, configuring Windows network settings to enforce DNS over HTTPS (DoH) or DNS over TLS (DoT) can help protect DNS queries from interception. Organizations should educate users about the risks of split tunneling and enforce policies that minimize exposure. Regularly reviewing VPN client updates and security advisories is essential to stay protected against similar vulnerabilities.

Description

ExpressVPN before 12.73.0 on Windows, when split tunneling is used, sends DNS requests according to the Windows configuration (e.g., sends them to DNS servers operated by the user's ISP instead of to the ExpressVPN DNS servers), which may allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive information about websites visited by VPN users.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-25728 is the compromise of user privacy through DNS leakage. Organizations and individuals using ExpressVPN with split tunneling enabled may have their DNS queries exposed to ISPs or malicious actors capable of intercepting DNS traffic. This exposure can reveal sensitive information about visited websites and user behavior, undermining the confidentiality guarantees expected from VPN usage. For businesses, this could lead to leakage of confidential browsing data, potentially exposing corporate research, client information, or internal resources accessed via VPN. Privacy-focused users, journalists, activists, and others relying on VPNs for anonymity are particularly at risk. Although the vulnerability does not affect data integrity or system availability, the breach of confidentiality can have serious reputational and operational consequences. The ease of exploitation and lack of required privileges increase the likelihood of exploitation once the vulnerability is widely known. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently limits immediate risk, but proactive mitigation is critical to prevent future abuse.

CWE-922Insecure Storage of Sensitive Information (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product stores sensitive information without properly limiting read or write access by unauthorized actors.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.6 (opens in a new tab)
V8.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V8.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 09:51 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-922

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats