CVE Tools

CVE-2026-71343

Windows Remote Access Connection Manager Remote Code Execution Vulnerability

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 24th percentile. A vendor fix is available.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

The vendor has published a fix. Version details are below where the sources state them.

Steps

Written by AI from the record
  1. Check each affected Windows machine’s installed update level for Windows Remote Access Connection Manager (look for whether you have been updated to the fixed build for your specific OS/version).
  2. On Windows 10, upgrade to one of: 10.0.14393.9512, 10.0.17763.9245, 10.0.19044.7725, or 10.0.19045.7725.
  3. On Windows 11, upgrade to one of: 10.0.22631.7582, 10.0.26100.9445, 10.0.26200.9445, or 10.0.28000.2954.
  4. On Windows Server, upgrade to one of: 6.2.9200.26349 (2012), 6.3.9600.23397 (2012 R2), 10.0.14393.9512 (2016), 10.0.17763.9245 (2019), or apply the corresponding Windows Server 2022/2025 updates that include the same Remote Access Connection Manager fix.
  5. After patching, confirm the system reports the expected OS build number and that Remote Access Connection Manager is functioning normally; then review remote access/event logs for suspicious activity around the service.

What it is

From the CVE record

Heap-based buffer overflow in Windows Remote Access Connection Manager allows an authorized attacker to execute code locally.

In plain language

Written by AI from the record

This is a Windows bug in the Remote Access Connection Manager that can let someone with an existing account run malicious code on your device; you should act now, especially if your network allows remote access or untrusted staff/users can get access to these machines.

CVE-2026-71343 is a heap-based buffer overflow in Windows Remote Access Connection Manager that can be triggered by an attacker with an account (low-privilege) to achieve local remote code execution (code execution on the same machine).

If you're affected

  • Full takeover of affected servers
  • Malware installation and persistence
  • Customer/business data theft
  • Service outages or ransomware staging

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS24th
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

0.3% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 24th percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

11 events over 16 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Patch availablerecord updated
  2. Patch availablerecord updated
  3. OpenVAS check added
  4. Record updatedrecord updated
  5. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped, record updated

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Scored 7.8 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector LocalRequires local access to the vulnerable system (e.g. local login, malicious file)
  • Attack Complexity LowNo special conditions — the attack can be reliably reproduced
  • Privileges Required LowRequires basic user-level privileges
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
  • Integrity HighTotal loss of integrity — attacker can modify any data in the component
  • Availability HighTotal denial of service — the component is completely unavailable

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Windows 10 Version 1607, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store