basicsecurity.net
Proof, not just disclosure.
Threats / Microsoft / CVE-2014-1776
CVE-2014-1776 · EUVD no mirror located · GCVE no mirror located Verified 2026-06-22

Microsoft Internet Explorer vulnerability

Microsoft Internet Explorer memory corruption vulnerability (CWE-416) allows remote code execution in user context. Actively exploited in the wild.

Verdict

Today item — known-exploited.

Use-after-free flaw in Internet Explorer enables attackers to execute arbitrary code with user privileges through crafted web content. High exploitation prevalence in active campaigns.

CISA KEV Yes · 2022-01-283EPSS 0.88013 (verify live)4
01

Is it exploitable?

— the evidence, ranked above the score
Reported exploitation
12 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2022-01-28).
CISA KEV ↗Confirmed
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.88013 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
Affected: Microsoft, Internet Explorer. Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.
NVD ↗Reported
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-416 Use After Free — weakness family: Memory safety.CWE assignment from the public NVD record; the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
NVD ↗Reported
WeaknessCWE-416 · Use After FreeMemory safety
02

Who’s exploiting it?

— attribution turns risk into urgency
Attribution not established

No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.

03

Why it matters

— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board
1

Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1

Attacker
I craft a malicious webpage or inject code into a legitimate site to trigger the memory corruption when a user visits.
Business
End-user systems become compromised, risking data theft, credential harvesting, and lateral network movement.
2

Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2

Attacker
I execute arbitrary code within the browser process, operating under the victim's user account permissions.
Business
Attackers gain persistent access to sensitive files, email, and applications accessible to the compromised user account.
3

Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3

Attacker
I establish a foothold to deploy secondary payloads, malware, or reconnaissance tools across the victim's system.
Business
Enterprise networks face increased risk of data exfiltration, ransomware deployment, and supply chain compromise.
04

What to do

— defensible action
  • Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05

Coverage & confidence

— what we know, and what we don’t

Established (cited)

  • KEV listing (CISA)
  • EPSS probability (FIRST)
  • 12 reported-exploitation source(s)
  • CWE weakness mapping (NVD)
  • Catalogued by microsoft (CNA)
  • Coverage gaps — stated, not hidden

  • No EUVD / GCVE mirror in feed — single-authority dependency for the identifier.
  • EPSS & exposure are time-varying; verify live at the source.
  • Threat-actor attribution not established from feed data — absence of a name is not absence of compromise.
  • No finder/reporter credit recorded in the public CVE entry — the work behind this find is unattributed.
  • Disclosure & credit2
    Catalogued by microsoftCNA
    Credited with finding itNo finder named in the public CVE record — the work behind this find is unattributed.