Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.49% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-45585High confidence
Windows BitLocker Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability
Microsoft · Windows 11 Version 24H2
6.8MediumCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Patch availableMedium technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Microsoft Windows 11 Version 24H2 and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Medium technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch available01
What, why and how
Microsoft is aware of a security feature bypass vulnerability in Windows publicly referred to as "YellowKey". The proof of concept for this vulnerability has been made public violating coordinated vulnerability best practices. We are issuing this CVE to provide mitigation guidance that can be implemented to protect against this vulnerability until the security update is made available. Mitigation FAQs Should I leverage the temporary mitigation? Microsoft recommends that you consider implementing these mitigations if you are concerned your devices and data are at risk of being compromised or stolen. For example, if your organization’s employees take their work devices home or on business travel. What impact to service availability/management could be caused by implementing the mitigations? Implementing these mitigations will not impact service availability or management operations. Do customers need to revert the changes made to mitigate the vulnerability once the security update to protect against this vulnerability is available? No. The security update will maintain the mitigation's behavior once the security update is installed. I am using TPM+PIN, am I at risk of this vulnerability being exploited No, if you are using TPM+PIN the vulnerability is not exploitable.
What
Microsoft is aware of a security feature bypass vulnerability in Windows publicly referred to as "YellowKey". The proof of concept for this vulnerability has been made public violating coordinated vulnerability best practices. We are issuing this CVE to provide mitigation guidance that can be implemented to protect against this vulnerability until the security update is made available. Mitigation FAQs Should I leverage the temporary mitigation? Microsoft recommends that you consider implementing these mitigations if you are concerned your devices and data are at risk of being compromised or stolen. For example, if your organization’s employees take their work devices home or on business travel. What impact to service availability/management could be caused by implementing the mitigations? Implementing these mitigations will not impact service availability or management operations. Do customers need to revert the changes made to mitigate the vulnerability once the security update to protect against this vulnerability is available? No. The security update will maintain the mitigation's behavior once the security update is installed. I am using TPM+PIN, am I at risk of this vulnerability being exploited No, if you are using TPM+PIN the vulnerability is not exploitable.
Why
Untrusted input reaches a command interpreter without sufficient validation or separation from command syntax.
How
An attacker operating through physical access may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Microsoft is aware of a security feature bypass vulnerability in Windows publicly referred to as "YellowKey". The proof of concept for this vulnerability has been made public violating coordinated vulnerability best practices. We are issuing this CVE to provide mitigation guidance that can be implemented to protect against this vulnerability until the security update is made available. Mitigation FAQs Should I leverage the temporary mitigation? Microsoft recommends that you consider implementing these mitigations if you are concerned your devices and data are at risk of being compromised or stolen. For example, if your organization’s employees take their work devices home or on business travel. What impact to service availability/management could be caused by implementing the mitigations? Implementing these mitigations will not impact service availability or management operations. Do customers need to revert the changes made to mitigate the vulnerability once the security update to protect against this vulnerability is available? No. The security update will maintain the mitigation's behavior once the security update is installed. I am using TPM+PIN, am I at risk of this vulnerability being exploited No, if you are using TPM+PIN the vulnerability is not exploitable.
Why
Untrusted input reaches a command interpreter without sufficient validation or separation from command syntax.
How
An attacker operating through physical access may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
- Likely attack path
- physical access → Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Physical
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-77 ↗
CWE-77: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:P/RL:W/RC:CCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVPhysicalAttack vector: The attacker needs physical access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 19 May 2026 · Last source change 10 Aug 2026, 15:13 UTC · CWE-77 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-31006
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceOther authority
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.