Skip to main content
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Recon
    Stand up malicious RDP server
  2. Delivery
    Phish victim with .rdp lure
  3. Exploit
    Victim's client connects out
  4. Install
    Send racing protocol messages
  5. C2
    Win TOCTOU, overflow heap
  6. Execute
    Execute code in user context
  7. Impact
    Pivot from workstation

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A06:2025 - Insecure Design
ASVS 5.0
V15 - Secure Coding and Architecture Concurrency control, locking
MITRE ATT&CK

1 technique across 1 tactic: Privilege Escalation

The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up.

Exploitation Conditions

Exploitation requires the victim to actively initiate an RDP connection from the vulnerable Remote Desktop Client to an attacker-controlled or compromised RDP server (UI:R in CVSS) - the bug is not reachable by an unsolicited inbound packet to a listening client. The attacker must also reliably win a race condition (AC:H) between client threads handling server-sent RDP protocol data, which typically requires repeated attempts or precise timing. No authentication to the victim's environment is needed (PR:N); the limiting factors are therefore the social-engineering step to get the user to connect and the timing reliability of the race, not credentials or special target configuration.

Impact

The CVSS 7.5 base score with vector AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H paints a nuanced picture: full CIA impact and no privileges required, but two friction factors - AC:H (race window must be hit reliably) and UI:R (the victim must initiate or accept the RDP connection) - keep this below worm-class severity. EPSS data was not provided in the input, the CVE is not on the CISA KEV list, and no public exploit code is referenced, so this is not currently confirmed actively exploited. The realistic risk profile is therefore targeted client-side exploitation (e.g., phishing a user to connect to a rogue RDP host, or compromising a legitimate jumpbox), not opportunistic mass exploitation; that said, RDP clients are heavily used by administrators and helpdesk staff, so a successful exploit gives access to high-value workstations.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

An attacker stands up a malicious RDP server (or compromises a legitimate one) and lures a target - for example a sysadmin - into connecting via a phishing email containing a crafted .rdp file or a typosquatted hostname. Once the victim's Remote Desktop Client establishes the session, the rogue server returns specifically timed protocol messages that win the race condition and overflow a heap buffer in the client, yielding code execution in the user's session on the workstation.

This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
Patch available 0.1% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Jun 09, 2026

Remote code execution in Microsoft Remote Desktop Client is possible when a user connects to an attacker-controlled or compromised RDP endpoint, where a race condition (CWE-362) can be triggered to corrupt heap memory and execute arbitrary code in the client process. The flaw is unauthenticated from the network attacker's perspective but requires user interaction to initiate the connection, and no public exploit has been identified at time of analysis.

RemediationAI

Patch availability and exact fix versions are not enumerated in the provided data, so consult the MSRC advisory at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-42909 and apply the Patch Tuesday updates listed for each affected Remote Desktop Client SKU (Windows in-box mstsc.exe, Windows App, macOS/iOS/Android Remote Desktop apps) on the relevant platforms. Until patched, compensating controls include instructing users to only initiate RDP sessions to known internal gateway hostnames, blocking outbound TCP/3389 and UDP/3389 from user workstations at the egress firewall except to sanctioned RD Gateways (trade-off: breaks ad-hoc RDP to home labs and third parties), and routing all RDP through an RD Gateway / Azure Bastion so connections to arbitrary attacker-controlled servers cannot be made; user education on not clicking .rdp files from email is a low-cost adjunct since UI:R is required.

Affected VersionsENISA

Windows 10 Version 1607 10.0.14393.0 <10.0.14393.9234
Windows 11 version 26H1 10.0.28000.0 <10.0.28000.2269
Windows Server 2012 6.2.9200.0 <6.2.9200.26132
Windows Server 2019 (Server Core installation) 10.0.17763.0 <10.0.17763.8880
Windows 10 Version 1809 10.0.17763.0 <10.0.17763.8880
Windows 11 Version 25H2 10.0.26200.0 <10.0.26200.8655
Windows Server 2012 (Server Core installation) 6.2.9200.0 <6.2.9200.26132
Windows Server 2016 10.0.14393.0 <10.0.14393.9234
Windows 10 Version 21H2 10.0.19044.0 <10.0.19044.7417
Remote Desktop client for Windows Desktop 1.2.0.0 <1.2.7214.0
Windows Server 2022 10.0.20348.0 <10.0.20348.5256
Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation) 10.0.26100.0 <10.0.26100.32995
Windows 11 Version 23H2 10.0.22631.0 <10.0.22631.7219
Windows Server 2019 10.0.17763.0 <10.0.17763.8880
Windows Server 2012 R2 (Server Core installation) 6.3.9600.0 <6.3.9600.23228
Windows 10 Version 22H2 10.0.19045.0 <10.0.19045.7417
Windows Server 2012 R2 6.3.9600.0 <6.3.9600.23228
Windows 11 Version 24H2 10.0.26100.0 <10.0.26100.8655
Windows App Client for Windows Desktop 1.00 <2.0.1193.0
Windows Server 2016 (Server Core installation) 10.0.14393.0 <10.0.14393.9234
Windows Server 2025 10.0.26100.0 <10.0.26100.32995

Affected Packages

microsoft remote_desktop_client_for_windows_desktop_1_2_7214_0 fix: Remote Desktop client for Windows Desktop 1.2.7214.0
microsoft windows_10_version_1607_10_0_14393_9234 fix: Windows 10 Version 1607 for 32-bit Systems 10.0.14393.9234, Windows 10 Version 1607 for x64-based Systems 10.0.14393.9234
microsoft windows_10_version_1809_10_0_17763_8880 fix: Windows 10 Version 1809 for 32-bit Systems 10.0.17763.8880, Windows 10 Version 1809 for x64-based Systems 10.0.17763.8880
microsoft windows_10_version_21h2_10_0_19044_7417 fix: Windows 10 Version 21H2 for 32-bit Systems 10.0.19044.7417, Windows 10 Version 21H2 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.19044.7417, Windows 10 Version 21H2 for x64-based Systems 10.0.19044.7417
microsoft windows_10_version_22h2_10_0_19045_7417 fix: Windows 10 Version 22H2 for 32-bit Systems 10.0.19045.7417, Windows 10 Version 22H2 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.19045.7417, Windows 10 Version 22H2 for x64-based Systems 10.0.19045.7417
microsoft windows_11_version_23h2_10_0_22631_7219 fix: Windows 11 Version 23H2 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.22631.7219, Windows 11 Version 23H2 for x64-based Systems 10.0.22631.7219
microsoft windows_11_version_24h2_10_0_26100_8655 fix: Windows 11 Version 24H2 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.26100.8655, Windows 11 Version 24H2 for x64-based Systems 10.0.26100.8655
microsoft windows_11_version_25h2_10_0_26200_8655 fix: Windows 11 Version 25H2 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.26200.8655, Windows 11 Version 25H2 for x64-based Systems 10.0.26200.8655
microsoft windows_11_version_26h1_10_0_28000_2269 fix: Windows 11 Version 26H1 for ARM64-based Systems 10.0.28000.2269, Windows 11 version 26H1 for x64-based Systems 10.0.28000.2269
microsoft windows_app_client_for_windows_desktop_2_0_1193_0 fix: Windows App Client for Windows Desktop 2.0.1193.0
microsoft windows_server_2012_6_2_9200_26132 fix: Windows Server 2012 6.2.9200.26132, Windows Server 2012 (Server Core installation) 6.2.9200.26132
microsoft windows_server_2012_r2_6_3_9600_23228 fix: Windows Server 2012 R2 6.3.9600.23228, Windows Server 2012 R2 (Server Core installation) 6.3.9600.23228
microsoft windows_server_2016_10_0_14393_9234 fix: Windows Server 2016 10.0.14393.9234, Windows Server 2016 (Server Core installation) 10.0.14393.9234
microsoft windows_server_2019_10_0_17763_8880 fix: Windows Server 2019 10.0.17763.8880, Windows Server 2019 (Server Core installation) 10.0.17763.8880
microsoft windows_server_2022_10_0_20348_5256 fix: Windows Server 2022 10.0.20348.5256, Windows Server 2022 (Server Core installation) 10.0.20348.5256
microsoft windows_server_2025_10_0_26100_32995 fix: Windows Server 2025 10.0.26100.32995, Windows Server 2025 (Server Core installation) 10.0.26100.32995
euvd remote_desktop_client_for_windows_desktop fix: 1.2.7214.0
euvd windows_10_version_1607 fix: 10.0.14393.9234
euvd windows_10_version_1809 fix: 10.0.17763.8880
euvd windows_10_version_21h2 fix: 10.0.19044.7417
euvd windows_10_version_22h2 fix: 10.0.19045.7417
euvd windows_11_version_23h2 fix: 10.0.22631.7219
euvd windows_11_version_24h2 fix: 10.0.26100.8655
euvd windows_11_version_25h2 fix: 10.0.26200.8655
euvd windows_11_version_26h1 fix: 10.0.28000.2269
euvd windows_app_client_for_windows_desktop fix: 2.0.1193.0
euvd windows_server_2012 fix: 6.2.9200.26132
euvd windows_server_2012_r2 fix: 6.3.9600.23228
euvd windows_server_2012_r2_server_core_installation fix: 6.3.9600.23228
euvd windows_server_2012_server_core_installation fix: 6.2.9200.26132
euvd windows_server_2016 fix: 10.0.14393.9234
euvd windows_server_2016_server_core_installation fix: 10.0.14393.9234
euvd windows_server_2019 fix: 10.0.17763.8880
euvd windows_server_2019_server_core_installation fix: 10.0.17763.8880
euvd windows_server_2022 fix: 10.0.20348.5256
euvd windows_server_2025 fix: 10.0.26100.32995
euvd windows_server_2025_server_core_installation fix: 10.0.26100.32995

Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)

Affects your stack

Affects 37 packages in microsoft, euvd

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Technical ContextAI · show details

Microsoft Remote Desktop Client implements the Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP/T.128) over channels that multiplex graphics, input, virtual channels, and clipboard/drive redirection data from the server. The combination of CWE-362 (concurrent execution using shared resource with improper synchronization, i.e., a race condition) with the heap-based buffer overflow described indicates a time-of-check to time-of-use class issue: one thread validates or sizes a buffer while another mutates the underlying data or state, allowing an attacker-controlled server response to land in an undersized heap allocation. Because the bug lives in the client-side parser/dispatch path rather than the server, the trust direction is inverted relative to classic RDP server bugs like BlueKeep - here the malicious endpoint attacks the user who connects to it.

Know when Remote Desktop Client gets its next vulnerability

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (microsoft) PRIMARY 7.5 HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CIRCL (temporal) 6.5 MEDIUM

Primary rating from Vendor (microsoft).

CVSS VectorVendor: microsoft

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

DescriptionCVE.org

Heap-based buffer overflow in Remote Desktop Client allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

Microsoft Remote Desktop Client is vulnerable to remote code execution (CVE-2026-42909, CVSS 7.5) when users connect to compromised or attacker-controlled RDP servers, with no public exploit identified but no vendor patch currently available. Organizations relying on RDP for remote workforce management face client system compromise risk if users are directed to malicious endpoints. Immediate network controls are required pending patch availability.

Business Impact: High
Compensating Controls

No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis. Interim mitigations: (1) Restrict RDP access exclusively to authenticated, internal jump hosts or bastion servers; (2) Disable RDP on systems where remote access is not required; (3) Implement network segmentation and firewall rules blocking RDP from external or untrusted networks; (4) Deploy enhanced logging and real-time alerting on RDP connection attempts and session activity; (5) Conduct user security awareness training against connecting to unknown or suspicious RDP endpoints.

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.1%
Top 79% exploitable
Vendor Action
See Below
Required. The vulnerability documented by this CVE requires customer action to resolve.
Vendor Status
Publicly Disclosed:No
Exploited:No
Latest Software Release:Exploitation Unlikely
Data Quality
6 sources
Confidence: High

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.1%
Patch available Yes
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
No
Human Impact
High
Technical Impact
Total

Priority Score

38
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +38
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

Attack Technique

A buffer overflow occurs when a program writes more data to a memory buffer than it was allocated to hold, causing the excess data to spill into adjacent memory regions.

Race conditions occur when multiple concurrent requests exploit the brief time gap between checking a condition and acting upon it (TOCTOU - Time of Check, Time of Use).

CVE-2021-34535 HIGH
8.8 Aug 12

Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.8), this vulnerability is remotel

CVE-2026-78463 HIGH
8.8 Sep 08

Code injection in Microsoft Remote Desktop Client for Windows Desktop (versions 1.2.0.0 through below 1.2.7279.0) enable

CVE-2026-80077 HIGH
8.8 Sep 08

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft's Remote Desktop client for Windows Desktop (versions 1.2.0.0 through below 1.2.

CVE-2026-80074 HIGH
8.8 Sep 08

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft's Remote Desktop client for Windows Desktop (versions 1.2.0.0 through 1.2.7279.0

CVE-2025-48817 HIGH
8.8 Jul 08

Relative path traversal in Remote Desktop Client allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

CVE-2024-38131 HIGH
8.8 Aug 13

Clipboard Virtual Channel Extension Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.8), this vulnerabil

CVE-2023-29362 HIGH
8.8 Jun 14

Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.8), this vulnerability is remotel

CVE-2022-22017 HIGH
8.8 May 10

Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.8), this vulnerability is remotel

CVE-2021-1669 HIGH
8.8 Jan 12

Windows Remote Desktop Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.8), this vulnerability is remo

CVE-2021-38665 HIGH
7.4 Nov 10

Remote Desktop Protocol Client Information Disclosure Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 7.4), this vulnerability

CVE-2024-49105 HIGH
8.4 Dec 12

Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. Rated high severity (CVSS 8.4), this vulnerability is remotel

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy