The Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) implementation in Microsoft Windows XP SP2 and SP3, Windows Server 2003 SP2, Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2, R2, and R2 SP1, and Windows 7 Gold and SP1 does not properly process packets in memory, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by sending crafted RDP packets triggering access to an object that (1) was not properly initialized or (2) is deleted, aka "Remote Desktop Protocol Vulnerability."
CVE-2012-0002
“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS v2 base score.
This CVE was only ever scored under CVSS v2.0. NVD CVSS v2.0 base 9.3 — NVD rates that HIGH (NVD's v2 bands: LOW 0.0–3.9 / MEDIUM 4.0–6.9 / HIGH 7.0–10.0; no CRITICAL band). Vector AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C. CVSS v2 is an older, coarser metric than v3.1/v4.0 (no Scope, no User Interaction, no Attack Requirements), so it is not directly comparable to a v3 or v4 score. NVD has never re-scored this record under v3. EPSS predicts 74% exploitation probability in the next 30 days; it does not lift the v2 base. EPSS sets EG Risk's exploitation input. Confidence: LOW.
- High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 74%
- Public exploit code is available (Metasploit, Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB)
No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2012 — if the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names; if not, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) or retire the product.
- CVSS v2.0 (legacy)
- 9.3HIGHNVD never assigned a CVSS v3 rating to this CVE
- EG Score
- 9.3HIGHlow confidence
- EG Risk
- 71EG Risk 71/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity93% × 45%The EG Score, 9.3 of 10.Exploitation74% × 40%FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.Automatability0% × 15%CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2012. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) or retire the product. - EPSS PROB
- 74%
- EPSS %ILE
- 99th
- KEV
- Not listed
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2012. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) or retire the product.
Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
Published
March 13, 2012
Last Modified
April 29, 2026
References (5)
- secure@microsoft · CVE Programhttp://blogs.quickheal.com/remote-desktop-protocol-vulnerability-cve-2012-0002-not-dead-yet/
- secure@microsoft · CVE Programhttp://www.securitytracker.com/id?1026790
- secure@microsoft · CVE Programhttp://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA12-073A.htmlUS Government Resource
- secure@microsoft · CVE Programhttps://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2012/ms12-020
- secure@microsoft · CVE Programhttps://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A14623
Weakness Classification(1)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 5× in last 7d / 11× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 14 repeat rows among the latest 67 are merged into the row they repeat.
- 2026-10-12 01:40 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-11 13:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-08 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-07 23:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-10-05 17:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-29 08:25 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-09-26 15:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-24 13:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-16 13:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-15 03:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-13 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-09-05 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-28 21:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-26 14:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-21 23:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-19 16:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-16 02:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-07 16:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-08-05 19:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-28 15:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-26 13:44 UTCEG score recomputeAssessed again: 9.3 HIGH
- 2026-07-23 01:06 UTCEG score recompute▼ 7.20
- 2026-07-23 00:10 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.2 HIGH
- 2026-07-22 21:48 UTCEG score recompute▼ 9.00
- 2026-07-22 14:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
Show 28 moreShow fewer
- 2026-07-21 15:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-20 17:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-19 14:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-15 16:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-13 06:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-09 19:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-04 06:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-07-01 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-27 03:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-25 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-24 14:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-23 21:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-16 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-15 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 74% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-14 23:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-13 22:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-12 23:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-10 22:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-10 13:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-06-01 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-05-29 05:10 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-05-29 05:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5rh5-ff3w-38rh · GitHub severity HIGH
- 2026-05-28 13:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-05-27 13:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-05-21 22:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-05-20 22:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
- 2026-05-18 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
Publicly available exploits
(3 references)Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (2 Metasploit modules, 1 Exploit-DB entry). No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2012. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system or retire the product.
- Metasploitauxiliary/scanner/rdp/ms12_020_check✓ verifiedPublished Feb 21, 2013
MS12-020 Microsoft Remote Desktop Checker
Open source ↗ - Metasploitauxiliary/dos/windows/rdp/ms12_020_maxchannelids✓ verifiedPublished Mar 19, 2012
MS12-020 Microsoft Remote Desktop Use-After-Free DoS
Open source ↗ - Exploit-DBEDB-18606✓ verifiedPublished Mar 16, 2012
Microsoft Terminal Services - Use-After-Free (MS12-020)
Open source ↗
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(4)
What is CVE-2012-0002?
When was CVE-2012-0002 made public?
Is CVE-2012-0002 actively exploited?
How do I remediate CVE-2012-0002?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2012-0002
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2012-0002?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.