Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-59286 is a critical-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 42th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Enterprise AI Assistants; in the Privacy and Disclosure risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — 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-2025-59286 is a command injection vulnerability (CWE-77) in Copilot due to improper neutralization of special elements used in a command. Published on 2025-10-09, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N), marking it as critical severity with network accessibility, low complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, changed scope, high confidentiality impact, low integrity impact, and no availability impact.
An unauthorized attacker can exploit this vulnerability over the network without authentication or user interaction. Successful exploitation allows disclosure of information, enabling remote data exfiltration with potential minor integrity alterations due to the command injection.
The Microsoft Security Response Center advisory at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2025-59286 provides details on patches and mitigation recommendations.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-33546
Vulnerability Data
Improper neutralization of special elements used in a command ('command injection') in Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- Enterprise AI Assistants
- Risk Domain
- Privacy and Disclosure
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: copilot
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8V1.2.9
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.