Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2015-2546 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Microsoft Windows Server 2008. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked in the top 5% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
The vulnerability is a memory corruption issue in the kernel-mode driver component known as Win32k, affecting multiple versions of Microsoft Windows including Vista SP2, Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8 and 8.1, Server 2012 Gold and R2, RT Gold and 8.1, and Windows 10. It is tracked as an elevation of privilege flaw (distinct from CVE-2015-2511, CVE-2015-2517, and CVE-2015-2518) and stems from improper handling that can be triggered by specially crafted input, corresponding to CWE-119.
Local users can exploit the flaw by running a crafted application on an affected system, resulting in elevation of privileges with the potential for full control over the target host. The CVSS 3.1 score of 8.2 reflects local attack vector, low complexity, and high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability when conditions such as user interaction are met.
Microsoft's security bulletin MS15-097 addresses the issue through available patches and updates for the listed Windows versions, recommending installation of the fixes to prevent exploitation of the Win32k driver.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2015-2639
Vulnerability Data
The kernel-mode driver in Microsoft Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT Gold and 8.1, and Windows 10 allows local users to…
more
gain privileges via a crafted application, aka "Win32k Memory Corruption Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability," a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-2511, CVE-2015-2517, and CVE-2015-2518.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 15 March 2022
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.
Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.