About Elevation of Privilege – Windows Common Log File System Driver (CVE-2025-32701, CVE-2025-32706) vulnerabilities

Security Update News

Update Information

Title About Elevation of Privilege – Windows Common Log File System Driver (CVE-2025-32701, CVE-2025-32706) vulnerabilities
Update ID AVLEONOV:6FCACC7BADE7C9C82195D0FD0D3DEB8A
Type avleonov
Published 2025-06-10T12:14:54
Last Updated 2025-06-10T12:14:54

Security Impact

CVSS Score 7.8
Severity HIGH
Attack Vector LOCAL

Affected CVEs

  • CVE-2025-29824
  • CVE-2025-32701
  • CVE-2025-32706

Update Details

![About Elevation of Privilege – Windows Common Log File System Driver \(CVE-2025-32701, CVE-2025-32706\) vulnerabilities](https://avleonov.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/photo_831@10-06-2025_15-14-54.jpg)

**About Elevation of Privilege – Windows Common Log File System Driver (CVE-2025-32701, CVE-2025-32706) vulnerabilities.** When Microsoft disclosed these vulnerabilities in the May Patch Tuesday, attackers were already exploiting them in the wild. The Common Log File System (CLFS) is a general-purpose logging service that can be used by software clients running in user-mode or kernel-mode.

The impact of exploiting these vulnerabilities is identical: an attacker can gain SYSTEM privileges. Their CVSS vectors are also the same (Base Score: 7.8).

What’s the difference? Bug type: for CVE-2025-32701 it’s CWE-416: Use After Free, while for CVE-2025-32706 it’s CWE-20: Improper Input Validation. CVE-2025-32701 credits MSTIC, while CVE-2025-32706 credits Google TIG and CrowdStrike ART.

No public exploits or exploitation details yet. ![🤷‍♂️](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/15.1.0/72×72/1f937-200d-2642-fe0f.png) But these vulns are likely being used in ransomware attacks, just like the EoP in CLFS (CVE-2025-29824) from April MSPT. ![😉](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/15.1.0/72×72/1f609.png)

На русском

View Advisory Details

💭 Join the Security Discussion

🔒 Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.