Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-20678 is a high-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Microsoft Windows 10 1507. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked in the top 15% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-20678 is a Remote Procedure Call Runtime Remote Code Execution Vulnerability affecting the RPC runtime component in Microsoft systems. It carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8 with the vector AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H and is also associated with CWE-843.
An attacker with low privileges can exploit the flaw remotely over a network connection without user interaction, achieving arbitrary code execution that fully compromises confidentiality, integrity, and availability on the target system.
Microsoft publishes mitigation guidance and patch information for this issue in its Security Response Center advisory at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-20678. The EPSS score has remained flat at a peak and current value of 0.0708 with no material increase observed after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-18393
Vulnerability Data
Remote Procedure Call Runtime Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.5.2V15.3.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and type-aware analysis) directly finds type-confusion flaws before deployment.
Engineering principles can require use of type-safe languages, static typing, and runtime type checks that structurally avoid allocating one type and accessing another.
Memory-protection controls limit the blast radius when a type-confusion access occurs but do not stop the flaw itself.
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 directly prevent type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.
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.