Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-38178

Memory Safety in Microsoft Windows 10 1507 ≤ 10.0.10240.20751

CISA KEVActive ExploitationEUVD ExploitedMemory Safety
Published
13 August 2024
Modified
28 October 2025
KEV Added
13 August 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.41 99th percentile
Risk Priority 82 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-38178 is a high-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Microsoft Windows 10 1507. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities 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-2024-38178 is a memory corruption vulnerability in the Scripting Engine, assigned CWE-843. It carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 reflecting network attack vector, high attack complexity, no required privileges, and required user interaction, with high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger the flaw by serving specially crafted content that a victim must interact with, resulting in arbitrary code execution within the scripting engine's context. The published EPSS score of 0.3023 indicates a moderate likelihood of exploitation in the wild.

Microsoft's advisory at msrc.microsoft.com and CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog both list the issue, confirming active exploitation and directing administrators to apply the vendor-supplied security updates. The unchanged peak and current EPSS values do not show a post-disclosure climb that would indicate rising attacker interest.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability

CWE(s)
KEV Date Added
13 August 2024

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-30397Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507both on KEV
CVE-2026-21519Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607both on KEV
CVE-2022-41033Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507both on KEV
CVE-2024-38107Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507both on KEV
CVE-2024-38193Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507both on KEV
CVE-2025-53726Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507
CVE-2025-53725Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507
CVE-2024-21363Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507
CVE-2024-20678Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507
CVE-2024-26232Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1507

Affected Assets

microsoft
windows 10 1507
≤ 10.0.10240.20751
microsoft
windows 10 1607
≤ 10.0.14393.7259
microsoft
windows 10 1809
≤ 10.0.17763.6189
microsoft
windows 10 21h2
≤ 10.0.19044.4780
microsoft
windows 10 22h2
≤ 10.0.19045.4780
microsoft
windows 11 21h2
≤ 10.0.22000.3147
microsoft
windows 11 22h2
≤ 10.0.22621.4037
microsoft
windows 11 23h2
≤ 10.0.22631.4037
microsoft
windows 11 24h2
≤ 10.0.26100.1457
microsoft
windows server 2012
r2
+4 more product configuration(s) — see NVD for full list

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.5.2
  • V3.2.3
  • V15.3.5

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

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.

finds

Security testing in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.

prevents

Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.

References