Threats / Microsoft / CVE-2015-2545
CVE-2015-2545
· EUVD no mirror located
· GCVE no mirror located
Verified 2026-09-19
Microsoft Office vulnerability
Microsoft Office remote code execution vulnerability via crafted EPS image. Improper input validation allows attackers to execute arbitrary code when processing malicious embedded graphics.
Verdict
Today item — known-exploited.
A remote code execution flaw in Microsoft Office's EPS image handling enables unauthenticated attackers to achieve arbitrary code execution through specially crafted documents. Active exploitation in the wild with high EPSS score indicates significant real-world risk.
CISA KEV Yes · 2022-03-034EPSS 0.85937 (verify live)5CVSS 7.8 (CISA)3CISA SSVC Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Impact: total3
01
Is it exploitable?
— the evidence, ranked above the scoreReported exploitation
14 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2022-03-03).
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.85937 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
CVSS 7.8 (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) · Affected: Microsoft, Office. Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.CVSS — CISA-assigned via the ADP container (CVE.org), version 3.1; the CNA left no metrics, so CISA's own score is used ahead of NVD.
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-20 Improper Input Validation.CWE assignment from the public NVD record (may be stale); the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
CISA SSVC (triage disposition)
Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: totalCISA's own stakeholder-specific triage inputs, published in the CVE record (CISA Coordinator role). NOTE: this is CISA's three decision points; the final Act/Attend/Track decision also requires a Mission & Well-being input not published here, so no overall decision is asserted.
Currency of the record
CISA added this to its KEV catalog 2367 days after the CVE record was published.KEV lag = CISA-KEV dateAdded − CVE.org datePublished; a floor on how long the known-exploited flaw sat in the public record before the federal catalog listed it. Severity/weakness here is CNA- or CISA-assigned (current at disclosure), independent of NVD's analysis backlog.
02
Who’s exploiting it?
— attribution turns risk into urgencyAttribution not established
No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.
03
Why it matters
— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board1
Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1
Attacker
I craft a malicious Office document containing a specially formatted EPS image that bypasses input validation.
Business
Attackers gain initial compromise vector for enterprise endpoints running Microsoft Office.
2
Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2
Attacker
I deliver the document via email or file sharing to target users.
Business
Social engineering becomes viable attack path requiring minimal user interaction.
3
Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3
Attacker
I trigger code execution when the victim opens the document and Office processes the malicious EPS.
Business
Arbitrary code runs with user privileges, enabling lateral movement and data exfiltration.
04
What to do
— defensible action- Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05
Coverage & confidence
— what we know, and what we don’tEstablished (cited)
Coverage gaps — stated, not hidden
Disclosure & credit2
Catalogued by microsoftCNA
Credited with finding itNo finder is named in the public CVE record or the scanned vendor advisory — attribution scoped to the sources checked.
Found an error? Propose a correction.
A correction is a cited counter-claim — it must cite a source,
gets reviewed by a second human, and is never auto-applied. See the
correction convention and our identity
npub1j7gt9ky7sfcrjn8jjee6693dkzvk4rahs0fk2suu7968dfns62zs3mqm3y.