Join our Newsletter — 33% off our NHI Course
Home› FAQ› Threats, Abuse & Incident Response› How do you patch or mitigate CVE-2015-2360 (Microsoft…
Threats, Abuse & Incident Response

How do you patch or mitigate CVE-2015-2360 (Microsoft Win32k Privilege Escalation)?

← Back to all FAQ
By NHI Mgmt Group Editorial Team Updated October 19, 2026 Domain: Threats, Abuse & Incident Response

CISA's required action for CVE-2015-2360 is to apply updates per vendor instructions. In practice, find every instance of Microsoft Win32k in your estate, apply the vendor security update or documented mitigation, and if no fix can be applied, remove internet exposure or take the product out of service. After patching, review logs for signs of earlier exploitation, because attackers used this flaw in the wild.

What the fix for CVE-2015-2360 should start with

Start by locating every system that still includes Microsoft Win32k in scope, then verify whether the vendor security update or documented mitigation has actually been applied. For a Windows kernel issue like this, the practical question is not whether one machine is patched, but whether any reachable host still exposes the vulnerable component.

Use your asset inventory, endpoint management data, and vulnerability findings together, because partial visibility is a common reason old kernel flaws remain exploitable long after a patch exists. If you cannot confirm the update state, treat the system as exposed until proven otherwise.

For vulnerability triage and emergency remediation workflow, the Zero-Day and Exploited Vulnerabilities Guide is the right operating model when a flaw has already been used in the wild.

When patching is delayed or unavailable

If you cannot apply the update immediately, reduce the attack surface first. That usually means removing internet exposure, restricting reachable management paths, and, where necessary, taking the affected product out of service until you can patch or replace it. For privilege-escalation flaws, exposure reduction matters because attackers often need only one foothold on the host to turn a low-privilege execution path into higher privilege.

Do not rely on “we have not seen abuse” as a compensating control. If the product remains reachable, assume the window is open for opportunistic exploitation until the fix or mitigation is in place and verified.

That same sequence is easier to operationalise when vulnerability work is tied to inventory, prioritisation, and verification, which is why the Vulnerability Management Guide is useful for sequencing exposure reduction and remediation checks.

What to check after remediation

After patching or mitigation, review logs and endpoint telemetry for signs that the flaw may have been used before the fix landed. The point is to look for unusual process launches, suspicious parent-child activity, privilege changes, or lateral movement that would fit post-exploitation behaviour on a Windows host. If you find evidence of compromise, treat it as an incident, not just a patching event.

For a privilege-escalation vulnerability, post-fix validation should include confirming that the vulnerable code path is no longer reachable and that no unexpected administrative changes were made during the exposure window. Where the host supported sensitive sessions or credentials, rotate any material that may have been accessible from that system.

The MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Matrix helps map the post-exploitation behaviours you should hunt for after suspected privilege escalation.

Risk and Threat Considerations

Privilege-escalation flaws are dangerous because they compress the attacker’s path from limited access to elevated control. If the vulnerable host is exposed to the internet or reachable from a compromised internal account, the attacker may not need a second exploit to gain meaningful control.

Failure mechanism: The vulnerable Win32k component can be abused to move from ordinary execution to higher privilege on the affected machine, which makes even a small initial foothold materially more valuable.

Impact: The consequence can include local system compromise, follow-on credential theft, tampering with security tooling, and easier lateral movement across the environment.

Standards & Framework Alignment

This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.

CIS Controls v8, NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and NIST CSF 2.0 set the governance and control requirements practitioners need to meet.

FrameworkControl / ReferenceRelevance
CIS Controls v8CIS-7 — Continuous Vulnerability ManagementCVE-2015-2360 requires inventory, prioritization, and verified remediation of exposed systems.
Recommendation — Continuously identify exposed Win32k systems and verify the fix is applied.
NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5SI-2 — Flaw RemediationThe question is specifically about applying vendor updates or mitigations for a known exploited flaw.
RA-5 — Vulnerability Monitoring and ScanningExposure confirmation and post-fix validation depend on scanning and finding vulnerable instances.
AU-6 — Audit Record Review, Analysis, and ReportingPost-patch log review is needed to spot earlier exploitation of the flaw.
Recommendation — Apply vendor remediation promptly and track exception handling until closure. Scan for remaining vulnerable hosts and recheck after remediation. Review logs for signs of exploitation before and after remediation.
NIST CSF 2.0RS.AN-01 — Investigation of Notifications From Detection SystemsThe answer calls for investigating whether the vulnerability was exploited before patching.
Recommendation — Investigate alerts and telemetry to determine whether compromise occurred.

Practitioner Guidance

What to prioritise: Patch or mitigate every exposed instance first, then verify that your highest-value Windows systems are no longer reachable through the vulnerable path. Old kernel flaws should be prioritised by exposure and privilege potential, not by how long they have been known.

What to verify: Confirm both the update state and the absence of suspicious activity during the exposure window. If you only verify the patch, you may miss the compromise that happened before remediation.

Practitioner takeaway: For exploited privilege-escalation bugs, remediation is only complete when exposure is removed, the fix is verified, and earlier compromise has been actively ruled out.

Free weekly newsletter

Subscribe to the NHI & AI Identity Journal

The latest on NHI and Agentic AI security – articles, research, breaches, news and events every week.

Bonus 33% off our NHI Course when you subscribe.

NHIMG Editorial Note
Reviewed and updated by the NHIMG editorial team on October 19, 2026.
NHI Mgmt Group — the #1 independent authority on Non-Human Identity, IAM, and Agentic AI security. nhimg.org