Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-62474

LPE in Microsoft Windows 10 1607 ≤ 10.0.14393.8688

Published
09 December 2025
Modified
12 December 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0036 29th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-62474 is a high-severity Improper Access Control (CWE-284) vulnerability in Microsoft Windows 10 1607. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism (T1548); ranked at the 29th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper access control in Windows Remote Access Connection Manager allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges locally.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
Why these techniques?

Improper access control in Windows Remote Access Connection Manager enabling local privilege escalation directly maps to T1548 (Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism) and T1068 (Exploitation for Privilege Escalation).

Confidence: HIGH · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-60705Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-20843Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-21238Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2025-59230Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-27914Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-33834Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-25176Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2025-21359Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-41092Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607
CVE-2026-20929Same product: Microsoft Windows 10 1607

Affected Assets

microsoft
windows 10 1607
≤ 10.0.14393.8688 · ≤ 10.0.14393.8688
microsoft
windows 10 1809
≤ 10.0.17763.8146 · ≤ 10.0.17763.8146
microsoft
windows 10 21h2
≤ 10.0.19044.6691
microsoft
windows 10 22h2
≤ 10.0.19045.6691
microsoft
windows 11 23h2
≤ 10.0.22631.6345
microsoft
windows 11 24h2
≤ 10.0.26100.7392
microsoft
windows 11 25h2
≤ 10.0.26200.7392
microsoft
windows server 2008
r2
microsoft
windows server 2012
all versions, r2
microsoft
windows server 2016
≤ 10.0.14393.8688
+4 more product configuration(s) — see NVD for full list

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
  • AC-6 Least Privilege
  • CM-5 Access Restrictions for Change
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 8 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V10.3.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly enforces access control policies on the Remote Access Connection Manager, blocking the unauthorized privilege elevation path described in the CVE.

prevent

Limits privileges assigned to authorized users and processes, reducing the impact of the improper access control flaw that allows local elevation.

prevent

Restricts who can modify or interact with privileged components such as the Remote Access Connection Manager, limiting opportunities for exploitation of the access control weakness.

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.AA-05 mostly match
prevents

PR.AA-05 directly enforces policy-based access management and least privilege, eliminating most improper-access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also covers implementation flaws and design gaps outside a single management control.

PR.PS-01 mostly match
prevents

Hardened baselines and deviation monitoring directly eliminate most configuration-induced access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also encompasses code-level and design flaws outside the scope of configuration management alone.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices catch most access-control defects during design/coding/testing (mostly), yet leave residual risk from runtime configuration, architecture, and operational controls (partial).

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities/credentials that support but do not implement access-control decisions, so it only partially prevents CWE-284 in either direction.

PR.AA-03 partial match
prevents

Authentication directly blocks unauthenticated actors (partial prevention of CWE-284) but leaves authorization logic, policy enforcement, and role checks untouched, so the control neither eliminates nor fully mitigates the broader weakness.

PR.DS-01 partial match
prevents

PR.DS-01 encryption mitigates impact of failed access checks on stored data but neither implements nor constrains access-control logic itself.

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.

prevents

Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.

prevents

Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.

prevents

By enforcing explicit rules on which identities or groups may perform read, write, delete or execute operations and by denying anonymous access to sensitive data, the control directly stops the creation of overly permissive or missing access-control checks.

prevents

Requiring one-to-one mapping of identities to entities and timely removal of unused identities directly stops attackers from leveraging stale or shared accounts to bypass access restrictions.

prevents

By explicitly transferring security roles and responsibilities when personnel change jobs or leave, the control reduces the chance that former employees retain access rights they no longer need, thereby limiting improper access control.

prevents

Physical entry controls enforce explicit authorization and authentication at every access point, directly stopping unauthorized actors from reaching information-processing assets.

References