CVE-2025-24993: CWE-122: Heap-based Buffer Overflow in Microsoft Windows 10 Version 1507
Threat actors are constantly developing new attack schemes — from OAuth token theft to attacks on AI agents — but the classics never quite leave their playbook. On any given day, an employee may receive malware attached directly to an email, or lying in wait behind a link embedded in an email. Making these attacks succeed still requires a degree of creativity, and in recent years attackers have increasingly adopted exotic file formats. Users don’t perceive these formats as dangerous; more importantly, many EDR and email security solutions skip scanning them entirely. Yet they’ve proven highly effective for deploying malware or harvesting credentials. Below are the file types that may be blind spots in your organization’s detection strategy — despite being observed as used in real-world attacks. Disk images This is the broadest and most dangerous attachment category. A disk image can contain a fully prepared, correctly structured set of files tailored to a wide range of attack scenarios. It mounts as a separate volume (standalone virtual disk), and when doing so often uses tools built into the operating system. The victim doesn’t need to extract anything or create suspicious folders on disk. The most versatile format is ISO, which dates back to the heyday of multimedia CDs. ISO images mount natively on every major OS without additional utilities, whether through simple tools like File Explorer or via the command line interface. This is precisely why threat actors have no hesitation in sending ISO files as email attachments . Somewhat less common are IMG containers, which also mount without additional tooling on macOS or Linux, but require installing a small, free utility such as OSFMount on Windows, or using WSL2 (Windows Subsystem for Linux), which is built into recent Windows versions. A file with identical content may also carry a DD extension. Threat actors also make use of VHD , a virtual disk format native to Windows, which generally works on Linux machines as well (via qemu-nbd or guestmount). On macOS, an additional utility — again, qemu-nbd is a common choice — is required to mount it. Note that on unpatched Windows systems, the victim doesn’t need to take any further action after the disk mounts: CVE-2025-24993 — a vulnerability actively exploited in real-world attacks — triggers attacker code execution immediately upon mounting the image. For completeness’ sake, VMDK, the disk image format used by VMware, is also worth detecting, though it’s largely ineffective in attacks on regular users since every popular OS requires additional software to mount it. All of these image formats can be viewed and unpacked not only with specialized tools, but with standard archive utilities like 7-Zip or RAR. As a result, the odds that the user will fall for the bait are higher than one might hope. In addition to not being a well-known potentially dangerous format, image files give attackers one further advantage: files extracted from disk images on Windows frequently lack the Mark of the Web flag, and therefore can be launched without triggering additional system warnings. There’s one more reason why EPP/EDR solutions must scan virtual machines and disk images: these formats are also used during later stages of an attack. To mask active file-system activity from monitoring tools, ransomware gangs sometimes run the entire encryption process inside a virtual machine deployed on the victim’s computer. The RagnarLocker ransomware strain has used VirtualBox for this purpose, while the CRON#TRAP campaign relied on a QEMU environment. MS Office files No, this isn’t about macro-laced DOC files. Microsoft has grown weary enough of this classic attack vector that macros in downloaded documents are now blocked outright , and enabling them requires considerable effort from the user. But Office relies on dozens of file formats, and some of the less common ones still occasionally give attackers an edge. Less familiar to both users and security sol…
AI Analysis
Technical Summary
CVE-2025-24993 is a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability identified in the NTFS file system driver of Microsoft Windows 10 Version 1507 (build 10.0.10240.0). The vulnerability arises due to improper handling of heap memory during NTFS operations, which can lead to memory corruption. An attacker with local access and the ability to trick a user into interacting with a crafted NTFS file or volume can exploit this flaw to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the logged-in user. The vulnerability does not require prior authentication or elevated privileges but does require user interaction, such as opening or accessing a malicious NTFS volume or file. The impact of successful exploitation is severe, allowing full compromise of the affected system, including confidentiality breaches, integrity violations, and denial of service. The CVSS v3.1 vector indicates low attack complexity, no privileges required, and user interaction needed, with full impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Although no public exploits are currently known, the flaw's nature and severity make it a critical concern for legacy Windows 10 users. Microsoft has not yet released a patch, but the vulnerability is officially published and tracked by CISA, indicating imminent remediation efforts.
Potential Impact
The vulnerability poses a significant risk to organizations still running Windows 10 Version 1507, which is an outdated and unsupported build. Successful exploitation can lead to arbitrary code execution, allowing attackers to install malware, steal sensitive data, or disrupt system operations. This can result in data breaches, ransomware deployment, or persistent footholds within corporate networks. Since the flaw requires local access and user interaction, insider threats or social engineering attacks could leverage this vulnerability. The broad impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability means critical systems could be compromised, affecting business continuity and regulatory compliance. Organizations relying on legacy Windows 10 systems in industrial, governmental, or enterprise environments are particularly vulnerable, as these systems often lack modern security controls and are harder to patch promptly.
Mitigation Recommendations
1. Upgrade affected systems to a supported and fully patched version of Windows 10 or later to eliminate exposure to this vulnerability. 2. Until patches are available, restrict local user access to trusted personnel only and enforce strict user privilege management to minimize attack surface. 3. Disable or limit NTFS features that are not essential, especially removable media or network shares that could be used to deliver malicious NTFS volumes. 4. Implement application whitelisting and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Educate users about the risks of interacting with unknown or untrusted removable media and network shares. 6. Monitor system logs and security alerts for suspicious NTFS-related activities. 7. Follow guidance from Microsoft and CISA for any emergency workarounds or updates once released.
Affected Countries
United States, China, India, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Japan, Brazil, Russia, South Korea, Canada, Australia
CVE-2025-24993: CWE-122: Heap-based Buffer Overflow in Microsoft Windows 10 Version 1507
Description
Threat actors are constantly developing new attack schemes — from OAuth token theft to attacks on AI agents — but the classics never quite leave their playbook. On any given day, an employee may receive malware attached directly to an email, or lying in wait behind a link embedded in an email. Making these attacks succeed still requires a degree of creativity, and in recent years attackers have increasingly adopted exotic file formats. Users don’t perceive these formats as dangerous; more importantly, many EDR and email security solutions skip scanning them entirely. Yet they’ve proven highly effective for deploying malware or harvesting credentials. Below are the file types that may be blind spots in your organization’s detection strategy — despite being observed as used in real-world attacks. Disk images This is the broadest and most dangerous attachment category. A disk image can contain a fully prepared, correctly structured set of files tailored to a wide range of attack scenarios. It mounts as a separate volume (standalone virtual disk), and when doing so often uses tools built into the operating system. The victim doesn’t need to extract anything or create suspicious folders on disk. The most versatile format is ISO, which dates back to the heyday of multimedia CDs. ISO images mount natively on every major OS without additional utilities, whether through simple tools like File Explorer or via the command line interface. This is precisely why threat actors have no hesitation in sending ISO files as email attachments . Somewhat less common are IMG containers, which also mount without additional tooling on macOS or Linux, but require installing a small, free utility such as OSFMount on Windows, or using WSL2 (Windows Subsystem for Linux), which is built into recent Windows versions. A file with identical content may also carry a DD extension. Threat actors also make use of VHD , a virtual disk format native to Windows, which generally works on Linux machines as well (via qemu-nbd or guestmount). On macOS, an additional utility — again, qemu-nbd is a common choice — is required to mount it. Note that on unpatched Windows systems, the victim doesn’t need to take any further action after the disk mounts: CVE-2025-24993 — a vulnerability actively exploited in real-world attacks — triggers attacker code execution immediately upon mounting the image. For completeness’ sake, VMDK, the disk image format used by VMware, is also worth detecting, though it’s largely ineffective in attacks on regular users since every popular OS requires additional software to mount it. All of these image formats can be viewed and unpacked not only with specialized tools, but with standard archive utilities like 7-Zip or RAR. As a result, the odds that the user will fall for the bait are higher than one might hope. In addition to not being a well-known potentially dangerous format, image files give attackers one further advantage: files extracted from disk images on Windows frequently lack the Mark of the Web flag, and therefore can be launched without triggering additional system warnings. There’s one more reason why EPP/EDR solutions must scan virtual machines and disk images: these formats are also used during later stages of an attack. To mask active file-system activity from monitoring tools, ransomware gangs sometimes run the entire encryption process inside a virtual machine deployed on the victim’s computer. The RagnarLocker ransomware strain has used VirtualBox for this purpose, while the CRON#TRAP campaign relied on a QEMU environment. MS Office files No, this isn’t about macro-laced DOC files. Microsoft has grown weary enough of this classic attack vector that macros in downloaded documents are now blocked outright , and enabling them requires considerable effort from the user. But Office relies on dozens of file formats, and some of the less common ones still occasionally give attackers an edge. Less familiar to both users and security sol…
CVSS v3.1
Score 7.8high
Affected software
Weaknesses
AI-Powered Analysis
Machine-generated threat intelligence
Technical Analysis
CVE-2025-24993 is a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability identified in the NTFS file system driver of Microsoft Windows 10 Version 1507 (build 10.0.10240.0). The vulnerability arises due to improper handling of heap memory during NTFS operations, which can lead to memory corruption. An attacker with local access and the ability to trick a user into interacting with a crafted NTFS file or volume can exploit this flaw to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the logged-in user. The vulnerability does not require prior authentication or elevated privileges but does require user interaction, such as opening or accessing a malicious NTFS volume or file. The impact of successful exploitation is severe, allowing full compromise of the affected system, including confidentiality breaches, integrity violations, and denial of service. The CVSS v3.1 vector indicates low attack complexity, no privileges required, and user interaction needed, with full impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Although no public exploits are currently known, the flaw's nature and severity make it a critical concern for legacy Windows 10 users. Microsoft has not yet released a patch, but the vulnerability is officially published and tracked by CISA, indicating imminent remediation efforts.
Potential Impact
The vulnerability poses a significant risk to organizations still running Windows 10 Version 1507, which is an outdated and unsupported build. Successful exploitation can lead to arbitrary code execution, allowing attackers to install malware, steal sensitive data, or disrupt system operations. This can result in data breaches, ransomware deployment, or persistent footholds within corporate networks. Since the flaw requires local access and user interaction, insider threats or social engineering attacks could leverage this vulnerability. The broad impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability means critical systems could be compromised, affecting business continuity and regulatory compliance. Organizations relying on legacy Windows 10 systems in industrial, governmental, or enterprise environments are particularly vulnerable, as these systems often lack modern security controls and are harder to patch promptly.
Mitigation Recommendations
1. Upgrade affected systems to a supported and fully patched version of Windows 10 or later to eliminate exposure to this vulnerability. 2. Until patches are available, restrict local user access to trusted personnel only and enforce strict user privilege management to minimize attack surface. 3. Disable or limit NTFS features that are not essential, especially removable media or network shares that could be used to deliver malicious NTFS volumes. 4. Implement application whitelisting and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Educate users about the risks of interacting with unknown or untrusted removable media and network shares. 6. Monitor system logs and security alerts for suspicious NTFS-related activities. 7. Follow guidance from Microsoft and CISA for any emergency workarounds or updates once released.
Technical Details
- Data Version
- 5.1
- Assigner Short Name
- microsoft
- Date Reserved
- 2025-01-30T15:14:20.993Z
- Cisa Enriched
- true
- Cvss Version
- 3.1
- State
- PUBLISHED
Threat ID: 682cd0f81484d88663aeb378
Added to database: 05/20/2025, 18:59:04 UTC
Last enriched: 02/26/2026, 23:57:22 UTC
Last updated: 08/28/2026, 17:33:07 UTC
Views: 111
Community Reviews
0 reviewsCrowdsource mitigation strategies, share intel context, and vote on the most helpful responses. Sign in to add your voice and help keep defenders ahead.
Want to contribute mitigation steps or threat intel context? Sign in or create an account to join the community discussion.
Actions
Updates to AI analysis require Pro Console access. Upgrade inside Console → Billing.
Need more coverage?
Upgrade to Pro Console for AI refresh and higher limits.
For incident response and remediation, OffSeq services can help resolve threats faster.
Latest Threats
Check if your credentials are on the dark web
Instant breach scanning across billions of leaked records. Free tier available.