CVE-2025-59213 SQL Injection in Microsoft Configuration Manager Patch Now

Microsoft has published an advisory for CVE-2025-59213, a high-severity SQL injection vulnerability in Microsoft Configuration Manager that can be abused for local elevation of privilege; administrators must urgently verify the exact KB mapping for their Configuration Manager branch and deploy the vendor-supplied update or mitigations immediately.

Background / Overview​

Microsoft Configuration Manager (often shortened to ConfigMgr or SCCM) is the on-premises systems management platform used by thousands of enterprises to deploy software, manage updates, inventory assets, and enforce configuration baselines. A successful privilege escalation in Configuration Manager can be a high-impact event because the product runs management services, database components, and administrative consoles which, when abused, give an attacker broad control over endpoint configuration, software deployment, and potentially sensitive data.
CVE-2025-59213 was published on October 14, 2025 and is described as an Improper neutralization of special elements used in an SQL command (SQL injection, CWE‑89) in Microsoft Configuration Manager. Public vulnerability trackers report a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.4 (High) and mark the attack vector as local with no privileges required in the base vector—meaning the flaw can be triggered from the host itself by an attacker who can run code or interact locally.
Microsoft’s Security Update Guide contains the vendor advisory and the authoritative mapping from CVE → KB/fixed package for each Configuration Manager branch and build; administrators must use Microsoft’s advisory as the final source of truth when planning remediation.

---

What the vulnerability is — plain language​

• At its core, CVE-2025-59213 is an SQL injection in Configuration Manager’s codepaths that interact with its local databases or SQL command construction logic.
• If an attacker can influence the input that becomes part of an SQL statement without proper neutralization (escaping, parameterization), they can change the meaning of that SQL command.
• In Configuration Manager’s context, that can permit unauthorized queries, unauthorized modifications, or execution paths that the product did not intend to expose—culminating in privilege escalation on the host where the management component runs.

This is not an abstract risk: Configuration Manager stores and manipulates critical state for endpoint management. An attacker who can inject SQL against a privileged management component may be able to modify service behavior, alter configuration, or create an operational condition that results in elevated code execution.

---

Technical analysis — how an SQL injection becomes elevation of privilege​

Where SQL injection typically appears​

SQL injection problems arise when code builds SQL statements by concatenating or interpolating strings that include user-controllable data, rather than using parameterized queries. In a management platform that talks to a local database (or constructs SQL-like commands for internal engine use), those places include:

• Administrative API inputs
• Import/parsing routines for configuration or discovery records
• Localized logging or query-generation facilities that take free-form input

If Configuration Manager builds an SQL statement that runs under a privileged service account and an attacker can control a sub-component of the statement, they can force the service to execute unexpected commands with elevated privileges.

Practical exploitation model (high level)​

• Attacker obtains the ability to run code or send input locally (common vectors: a compromised standard user session, malicious MSI/installer, or a script run by a user).
• The attacker feeds specially crafted input into a ConfigMgr interface that constructs SQL commands improperly.
• Crafted input alters or appends SQL so the service executes commands that change configuration, elevate the attacker’s token, or load attacker-controlled code.
• The attacker escalates from a standard local account to SYSTEM-equivalent context and performs post‑exploitation actions.

The exploitation complexity is influenced by how the vulnerable code parses inputs, whether the service validates or parameterizes inputs, and the difficulty of getting the needed local foothold. Public scoring and vendor descriptions indicate the attack vector is local, the attack complexity is low in the CVSS vector reported by aggregators, and the potential impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is high.

---

Affected products and version guidance (verification)​

Multiple third‑party vulnerability trackers list Microsoft Configuration Manager branches and build thresholds as affected; specific affected builds reported in community feeds include Configuration Manager versions in the 2400/2500 current-branch families, but precise KB/build mappings vary among aggregators. Administrators must confirm the exact affected builds for their environment using Microsoft’s Security Update Guide and the Updates and Servicing node in the Configuration Manager console before applying automation.
Microsoft historically provides per-branch KBs and may issue a revised KB that supersedes earlier fixes—verify the Update Catalog and the Configuration Manager console (“Updates and Servicing”) for the definitive package, and check whether the patch is a roll-up or a revised release for a previous CVE. For earlier Configuration Manager fixes, Microsoft has published revised KBs where fixes were updated post-release; treat vendor KBs as authoritative for which build numbers to update.
Caveat: some third‑party feeds show slightly different build thresholds and product tags for the same CVE. That identifier fragmentation means relying on a CVE number alone can lead to deploying the wrong package; always map CVE → vendor advisory → KB → test build before broad rollouts.

---

Exploitability, observed activity, and proof-of-concept status​

As of publication of this feature:

• Public trackers show CVSS 3.1 = 8.4 (High) for CVE‑2025‑59213 and list the weakness as CWE‑89 (SQL injection).
• There were no authoritative reports from Microsoft or widely read incident response feeds that confirm active exploitation in the wild at the time the CVE was published; community tracking pages and the initial vendor advisory focused on remediation rather than weaponized exploit details. Operational responders should not assume exploit code is available, but must assume motivated attackers will prioritize this issue.

Flagging uncertainty: public evidence of exploitation can change rapidly. If detection telemetry shows suspicious local process activity, SQL-like statements being issued by ConfigMgr services, or unexpected configuration changes, treat these signals as high-priority incidents and escalate to incident response immediately.

---

Immediate mitigation and remediation playbook​

The primary remediation for CVE-2025-59213 is to apply the Microsoft Configuration Manager update that fixes the vulnerability. Follow this ordered, defensible playbook:

• Confirm exact applicability
• Identify Configuration Manager hierarchies, site server roles, and installed versions across your environment.
• Verify whether the node is a primary site, CAS, secondary site, management point, or client and match that to the vendor advisory’s affected list. Use the Configuration Manager console (Updates and Servicing) to view available hotfix/KB updates.
• Obtain and test the vendor-supplied update
• Download the KB or updated service package from Microsoft Update Catalog or the Configuration Manager console.
• Stage the update in a lab or pre-production tier to validate behavior and regression risk.
• Confirm any console or database schema changes; run post-update validation checks on functionality (client check-ins, deployments, reporting, and application distribution).
• Deploy in phased rollouts
• Use a phased deployment approach (test → pilot → broad) and monitor for service disruption.
• Prioritize site servers, management points, and any servers that expose ConfigMgr management services to administrators or management networks.
• If patching is temporarily impractical, implement compensating controls
• Lock down local administrative access and restrict who can log on interactively to servers hosting Configuration Manager site systems.
• Harden consoles and limit membership of Configuration Manager administrative roles.
• Use endpoint allow‑listing and EDR rules to detect or block unauthorized scripts or installers that could be used to gain the initial local foothold.
• Increase logging and EDR telemetry around SMS/SCCM processes, database access, and unusual SQL statements.
• Validate fix and report
• Verify the KB is installed and that the vulnerability no longer appears in vendor advisory checklists for your builds.
• Document rollout status and any deviations from expected behavior.

Practical note: because Configuration Manager manages OS and agent configuration, test updates carefully to avoid a management-plane disruption. Use a maintenance window and ensure backups of site databases are taken before applying server-side patches.

---

Detection and hunting recommendations​

Early detection is the best line of defense for local EoP vulnerabilities:

• Hunting queries and signals
• Search EDR telemetry for unexpected launches of tools with SYSTEM impersonation, elevated token creation events, or unusual child processes spawned from ConfigMgr service processes.
• Monitor Configuration Manager logs (site server logs and client logs) for unusual SQL errors, repeated failed queries, or sudden increases in SQL exceptions that could indicate malicious input being fed to SQL‑construction code.
• Watch for abnormal modifications to site configuration, package sources, deployments, or changes to collections that could indicate an attacker is trying to alter management behavior.
• Example detection heuristics (conceptual)
• Detect non-administrator accounts invoking management console actions or scripts that modify SMS database records.
• Alert on any write activity to site database files or schema changes outside of scheduled maintenance windows.
• Post‑compromise indicators
• New scheduled tasks, services, or extensions created by ConfigMgr agents that were not authorized.
• Unexpected changes in deployment content, application sources, or run‑as accounts.
• Elevated token creation events (Event Log) correlated to Management Service processes.

These detection ideas are practical starting points; adapt them to your EDR and SIEM tooling and enrich with environment-specific baselines.

---

Operational risk assessment — who should care most​

• Enterprises running on-premises Configuration Manager hierarchies that manage large fleets: high priority.
• Organizations that use ConfigMgr to deploy software or agents into critical systems (bastions, jump hosts, build servers): elevated urgency.
• Environments with lax controls on local users, shared developer machines, or self-service installers: elevated exploitation likelihood because the initial local foothold is easier to obtain.

An attacker who chains a local foothold with CVE‑2025‑59213 can pivot from a low-privilege user to SYSTEM on the ConfigMgr host, then abuse the management plane to deploy malicious software or cause lateral spread. That makes this vulnerability valuable to both opportunistic and targeted adversaries.

---

Strengths and limitations of vendor and community information​

Strengths:

• Microsoft’s Security Update Guide provides the canonical vendor advisory and the authoritative KB mapping for actual fixes; following its guidance is the correct operational approach.
• Community and CVE aggregation sites have rapidly published metadata (CWE, CVSS vector, published date) that help defenders triage severity quickly.

Limitations and risks:

• Third‑party aggregators sometimes show identifier fragmentation or divergent build thresholds. Relying solely on a CVE number without cross-checking the vendor’s KB and build numbers can cause incorrect or incomplete remediations.
• Public advisories intentionally withhold exploit details to slow weaponization; that’s sensible, but it means defenders must assume the worst-case exploitation model and prioritize patching rather than waiting for detailed exploit analyses.
• At the time of initial publication, there was no widespread, authoritative public report of in-the-wild exploitation specific to CVE‑2025‑59213; this can lull organizations into complacency—treat absence of evidence as not evidence of absence.

---

Recommended prioritized checklist (copy-paste friendly)​

• Inventory: enumerate all Configuration Manager site servers, roles, and client versions across the estate. (SCCM console + CM DB queries)
• Review Microsoft’s Security Update Guide entry for CVE‑2025‑59213 and confirm the KB(s) and fixed build(s) that apply to your Configuration Manager branch.
• Stage the update in a lab and run full site-server and client validation tests.
• Deploy the update in a phased fashion (pilot → broad), verifying health and monitoring logs and telemetry for anomalies.
• If patching is delayed, enforce stricter local access controls, disable or lock down administrative consoles, and boost EDR detection around SCCM processes.
• After remediation, verify patch state across all site servers, confirm clients are healthy, and document remediation completion.

---

Final assessment and closing guidance​

CVE‑2025‑59213 is a credible, high‑severity SQL injection vulnerability in Microsoft Configuration Manager with the potential to enable local elevation of privilege and management-plane abuse. The risk is amplified by Configuration Manager’s role in enterprise endpoint control: an impacted or compromised ConfigMgr server creates a powerful platform for attackers to persist, distribute, and escalate. Public trackers and vendor advisories uniformly rate the issue as high and recommend patching; however, differences in reported build thresholds among third‑party sources underline the need to consult Microsoft’s Security Update Guide and the Configuration Manager console for the precise KB mapping before deploying fixes.
Action now: validate your ConfigMgr inventory, prioritize the vendor fix in your rollout pipeline, and apply compensating controls where immediate patching is impractical. Treat any indications of local privilege escalation related to ConfigMgr services as a critical incident and follow your IR playbook.
Caveat: this article synthesizes vendor advisories and public aggregation feeds current at publication; exploitation activity and vendor guidance can change quickly—re-check Microsoft’s Security Update Guide for any revised KBs or additional remediation steps before finalizing your change window.

---

Conclusion
The Configuration Manager ecosystem is a central axis of control for many Windows estates. CVE‑2025‑59213 is a reminder that local vulnerabilities in management software are high-value targets for adversaries. Rapid verification, disciplined patching guided by the vendor’s KB mapping, and targeted detection are the most effective defenses. Prioritize the fix, test thoroughly, and harden management-plane access to reduce both the likelihood and impact of exploitation.

---

Source: MSRC Security Update Guide - Microsoft Security Response Center