Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-30397 is a high-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Microsoft Windows 10 1809. 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 3% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
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-2025-30397 is a type confusion vulnerability, tracked as CWE-843, that affects the Microsoft Scripting Engine. The flaw permits an unauthorized attacker to execute arbitrary code over a network when the engine processes incompatible resource types.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger the issue by supplying crafted content that the scripting engine mishandles. Successful exploitation yields high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, although the CVSS vector indicates high attack complexity and a requirement for user interaction.
Microsoft’s advisory at msrc.microsoft.com provides the primary patch guidance, while Vicarius has published accompanying detection and mitigation scripts. The vulnerability also appears in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, confirming that in-the-wild exploitation has been observed.
EPSS currently sits at 0.2074 with a recorded peak of 0.2127.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-14411
Vulnerability Data
Access of resource using incompatible type ('type confusion') in Microsoft Scripting Engine allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 13 May 2025
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.5.2V3.2.3V15.3.5
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.
Security testing in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.
Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.
Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.
Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.