Note: I couldn’t find any authoritative record for CVE-2025-53156 in the major public vulnerability databases (MSRC / NVD / MITRE / CVE.circl / CVE Details) as of August 12, 2025. The Storage Port Driver information-disclosure vulnerability widely reported in Microsoft’s June 2025 updates is tracked as CVE-2025-32722 (and related vendor records such as CVE-2025-49684 reference the same Storage Port Driver issue). If you intentionally meant CVE-2025-53156, please confirm or paste the MSRC advisory page content; otherwise this article summarizes the Storage Port Driver information-disclosure vulnerability that Microsoft fixed in June 2025 (public advisories and industry write-ups refer to CVE-2025-32722 / related CVEs). All dates and recommendations below are current as of August 12, 2025.
Summary
- Vulnerability class: Local information disclosure / improper access control (buffer over-read reported in the Storage Port Driver - storport.sys).
- Impact: Local, authenticated attacker can read kernel memory or reveal kernel memory addresses (ASLR / KASLR information), which can help build further exploits (e.g., privilege escalation).
- Exploitability: Local only — an attacker needs local access (an account on the machine). No public active exploitation (at time of patch) was reported, but disclosure of kernel addresses increases risk for chained attacks.
- Microsoft mitigation: Security updates released in the June 2025 Patch Tuesday set of updates. Administrators should apply vendor patches for affected Windows releases.
- Urgency: Important. Not a remote code execution, but can reduce the effort for attackers to escalate privileges; prioritize based on exposure (local-accessible machines, multi-user or shared systems, servers with many privileged local accounts should be patched sooner).
- Component: Windows Storage Port Driver (storport.sys / Storage Port Driver layer responsible for storage device interactions).
- Bug type: A buffer over-read / improper access control logic in the Storage Port Driver allows an authenticated local user (non-privileged or lower privileged account) to trigger logic that results in disclosure of protected memory or kernel addresses. In practical terms, the flaw can reveal kernel memory layout or values that are normally randomized and hidden by ASLR/KASLR.
- Attack vector: Local; adversary needs to run code or interact with the driver locally (for example, calling specific IOCTLs or operations that the Storage Port Driver exposes to user-mode or through a service).
- Likely exploitation benefit: With kernel memory layout information an attacker can defeat ASLR, making subsequent exploit attempts (e.g., escalation vulnerabilities) easier and more reliable.
- Microsoft’s June 2025 security updates list broad coverage across supported Windows client and server releases. Industry trackers and vendor advisories (published June–July 2025) list affected releases including, but not limited to:
- Windows 10 (earlier servicing line builds such as 1507, 1607, 1809, 21H2, 22H2 — builds vary).
- Windows 11 (22H2, 23H2, 24H2 family builds).
- Windows Server (2012, 2012 R2, 2016, 2019, 2022, and later Server 2025 builds depending on installed build numbers).
- Important: exact affected builds and the KB for the fix depend on the specific Windows build installed. Always confirm by entering the machine’s exact OS build and checking Microsoft’s Security Update Guide entry for the CVE or the monthly security bulletin for June 2025.
- Many vendor write-ups categorized this as “Important” with a mid-range CVSS (public write-ups indicated around 5.5 / medium-to-high for information disclosure). The main reason for not being rated Critical or Remote is the local-only attack vector and the fact it’s an information disclosure, not direct code execution.
- Even with a mid CVSS, the real-world risk increases if an attacker can combine this with other vulnerabilities (local privilege escalation) — i.e., the real threat is a multi-stage chain.
- Local information-disclosure bugs are frequently used as one step in an attack chain: reconnaissance → local info leak (ASLR defeat) → privilege escalation → persistence/data exfiltration.
- Multi-user systems, terminal servers, multi-tenant servers, or systems where many people can run code (developer workstations, build agents, lab machines, shared admin workstations) are higher risk.
- Servers with restricted local access have lower immediate risk, but administrative systems and endpoints that can be accessed by a large number of users should be patched promptly.
There are no widely published, reliable IOC strings specific to this bug (no known public exploit samples at patch time). However, you can monitor for anomalous local behavior consistent with attempts to talk to storage drivers or probe kernel memory:
- Monitor for unexpected accesses to storage driver device objects or unusual IOCTL calls targeted at storport (e.g., programs repeatedly opening device handles for storage device targets).
- Watch for unusual application crashes or BSODs referencing storport.sys or other storage-related drivers (these can be signs of attempted exploitation or fuzzing).
- Endpoint/EDR detection ideas:
- Alert on processes that open handles to \Device\StorPort* or call low-level Storage IOCTLs from non-standard processes.
- Detect local processes invoking DeviceIoControl with storage-related IOCTLs at a high frequency.
- Detect suspicious processes running as low-privileged accounts that attempt repeated privileged device operations.
- Use Sysmon (with DeviceDrivers, FileCreate, ProcessCreate, and ProcessAccess configs) and EDR to capture suspicious behavior. Example Sysmon rules: log process access to the device namespace and capture command line for processes that open storage device handles.
- Check Windows Event Logs for driver errors or repeated access errors tied to storport.sys (Event IDs vary; device driver errors often appear in System channel).
- If you have an EDR solution, run a search for recent processes that called DeviceIoControl on storage-related device objects.
- Confirm the CVE and the matching KB(s) for your exact OS builds:
- For each Windows build in your estate, query Microsoft’s Security Update Guide for the June 2025 updates and the advisory corresponding to the Storage Port Driver fix (the vendor advisory in June 2025 lists the Storage Port Driver fix).
- Don’t assume a single KB covers all builds — Microsoft publishes build-specific update packages.
- Test the patch:
- In your patch test environment, install the relevant June 2025 security update for the target OS build and run regression tests for storage I/O workload and any vendor storage stack drivers (third-party drivers).
- Pay attention to storage drivers, SAN client software, and hardware vendor drivers that interact with storport.sys.
- Schedule and deploy:
- For desktops/standard endpoints: roll out via Windows Update for Business / WSUS / Intune in staged rings (pilot → broad).
- For servers: schedule maintenance windows; apply the appropriate KBs and reboot as required.
- For critical servers with multiple admins or shared local access, prioritize sooner rather than later.
- Post-patch verification:
- Confirm the correct KB is installed on each host:
- PowerShell: Get-HotFix -Id <KB number> or check via Get-WindowsPackage / Get-HotFix.
- WMI: wmic qfe | findstr <KB number>
- Confirm storport.sys driver version updated (check driver file version in %windir%\System32\drivers).
- Re-run a subset of functional tests for storage workloads and verify no new driver errors in System Event Log.
- Compensating controls if immediate patching isn’t possible:
- Restrict local accounts: remove/disable unused local accounts; restrict interactive logon rights via Group Policy.
- Reduce attack surface: block unnecessary user ability to install or run unsigned drivers or tools that can call low-level IOCTLs.
- Apply principle of least privilege: ensure accounts are not local admin unless required.
- Increase monitoring and EDR sensitivity on machines that can’t be patched immediately.
- Inventory:
- Create an inventory of Windows builds and machines that might be affected (use SCCM/WSUS/Intune).
- Identify KBs:
- For each build, identify the exact KB number from Microsoft’s Security Update Guide (the June 2025 update sets).
- Pilot:
- Pick a small pilot group (representative endpoints + servers) and deploy.
- Monitor:
- Monitor for driver failures, storage errors, performance regressions.
- Full deploy:
- Roll out to remaining devices in staged rings.
- Verify:
- Confirm KB installation and driver versions; run post-deployment health checks.
- Check for installed KB (PowerShell):
- Get-HotFix | Where-Object { $_.HotFixID -like "KB5060*" }
- (Adjust KB number pattern to the one you need.)
- WMI / command-line:
- wmic qfe list brief | findstr KB5060998
- Check storport.sys version (PowerShell):
- (Get-Item "$env:windir\System32\drivers\storport.sys").VersionInfo | Select FileVersion
- Use Windows Update / WSUS / SCCM / Intune for deployment; do not copy driver files manually unless vendor recommends.
- Immediate (within 7 days): Highly exposed systems where many accounts have local access (terminal servers, jump boxes, shared admin workstations).
- Short-term (within 30 days): Typical corporate endpoints, developer machines, servers with limited local access.
- Low-priority (as schedule allows): Air-gapped systems / devices with no possibility of local code execution by untrusted users — still patch during normal maintenance windows.
- Information-disclosure vulnerabilities that reveal kernel pointers are commonly used to facilitate successful privilege-escalation attacks. The absence of public exploitation does not mean low risk — it only means public exploit code isn’t (yet) widely available.
- Attackers with local access (insider threat, compromised low-privilege accounts, or social engineering) can exploit such gaps as part of a stealthy chain.
- Some organizations reported that storage-related patches required reboots and that certain third-party storage drivers needed vendor driver updates after the OS patch. Always test with your vendor’s storage stack (SAN/NAS client software, virtual disk filters, vendor anti-cheat or virtualization drivers that hook storport).
- Take backups before mass server patching; for critical storage systems consider a staged maintenance plan with verified roll-back steps.
- Search for processes opening handles to device namespace entries related to storage:
- Windows EDR: find DeviceIoControl calls to storage IOCTLs from unexpected process names.
- Sysmon: look for ProcessAccess events where a low-privilege process accesses a storage service process or disk device object.
- SIEM: alert on repeated access errors in System log referencing storport.sys or NTFS storage driver errors following odd process activity.
Q: Is this a remote exploit?
A: No. The published advisory describes a local information disclosure vulnerability. An attacker needs local authenticated access.
Q: Does this allow privilege escalation by itself?
A: Not directly. It’s an information-disclosure issue; by revealing kernel memory layout or addresses, it can facilitate exploitation of other bugs (e.g., privilege escalation exploit chains).
Q: My environment uses third-party storage drivers. Is there extra risk?
A: Yes — third-party drivers that interact with storport can change the attack surface. Test vendor drivers after applying Microsoft updates. Also check vendor advisories for updated storage stack drivers that might be required.
Q: How do I verify I am protected?
A: Ensure the correct June 2025 KB(s) for your exact Windows build are installed and the machine was rebooted where required. Verify storport.sys file version matches the patched version for your build.
Final notes and next steps
- Confirm the CVE number: you provided CVE-2025-53156 and a link to an MSRC page with that path. I was unable to locate a public record for CVE-2025-53156 in the major databases; the Storage Port Driver vulnerability fixed in Microsoft’s June 2025 updates is generally referenced as CVE-2025-32722 (and related vendor records like CVE-2025-49684 reference buffer over-read in the Storage Port Driver). If your source is an internal or vendor-assigned mapping (some organizations re-map CVE identifiers or use internal references), paste the MSRC advisories you have and I will reconcile them against public entries.
- If you want, I can:
1) Pull the exact Microsoft advisory page for the CVE you referenced and extract the official affected builds and KB numbers (I’ll need the page content or allow the updater to run the MSRC page fetch).
2) Produce a tailored deployment plan (WSUS/Intune/SCCM playbook) specific to your environment, including exact KB numbers for your Windows builds if you provide a short inventory (OS family + build).
3) Provide sample EDR rules or Sysmon configuration snippets you can paste into your EDR to detect attempts to exploit storage driver ioctl paths.
- (A) fetch and extract the Microsoft advisory page for the CVE you gave and reconcile the CVE number vs. the publicly listed CVE in June 2025, or
- (B) build a patch-deployment playbook tailored to your environment (WSUS/Intune/SCCM) — if so, please share the Windows versions/builds you need prioritized?
Source: MSRC Security Update Guide - Microsoft Security Response Center
