Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
This vulnerability lets a local user bypass intended self-protection in Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0 and terminate a protected process. It is not a remote break-in by itself, but it can weaken endpoint defenses if an attacker already has local access.
Executive priority
Prioritize this where the product is still deployed on managed endpoints, especially systems with shared or weakly controlled local access. Treat it as defense degradation rather than initial compromise evidence.
Technical view
CVE-2018-10739 affects 2345MPCSafe.exe in Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0. The issue involves improper handling of WM_SYSCOMMAND, allowing local users to bypass intended process protections and terminate the process. No CVSS score, CWE, or vendor fix is provided in the source bundle.
Likely exposure
Exposure appears limited to systems running Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0. The provided affected-product metadata is incomplete, so confirm by software inventory rather than relying on CPE matching.
Exploitation context
The source bundle supports local-user exploitation affecting process protection. It does not support remote exploitation or active exploitation in the wild. The CVE is not listed as KEV in the provided data.
Researcher notes
Evidence is sparse: the CVE description and a public GitHub reference identify the vulnerable component and local process-protection bypass, but no official CVSS, CWE, patch information, or affected CPE data is supplied.
Mitigation direction
- Identify endpoints running Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0.
- Check vendor guidance for fixed versions or supported replacement software.
- Restrict local user privileges where this product remains deployed.
- Monitor for unexpected termination of 2345MPCSafe.exe.
- Consider replacing unsupported endpoint security software.
Validation and detection
- Query endpoint inventory for Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0.
- Confirm whether 2345MPCSafe.exe is present and active.
- Review EDR or Windows logs for unexpected process termination.
- Verify any vendor advisory before marking remediation complete.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CVE-2018-10739 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- Unknown
- CVSS
- Not scored
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
CVSS and timeline data
No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://github.com/rebol0x6c/2345_wm_syscommandCVE reference · x_refsource_MISC
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.