Elastic rejects claims of a zero-day RCE flaw in Defend EDR – Against Invaders – Notícias de CyberSecurity para humanos.

Relatório Picus Blue 2025

Enterprise search and security company Elastic is rejecting reports of a zero-day vulnerability impacting its Defend endpoint detection and response (EDR) product.

The company’s statement follows a blog post froma company called AshES Cybersecurityclaiming to have discovereda remote code execution (RCE) flaw in Elastic Defend that would allow an attacker to bypass EDR protections.

Elastic’s Security Engineering team “conducted a thorough investigation” but could not find “evidence supporting the claims of a vulnerability that bypasses EDR monitoring and enables remote code execution.”

Zero-day claims

According to AshES Cybersecurity’s write-up from August 16,a NULL pointer dereference flaw in Elastic Defender’s kernel driver, ‘elastic-endpoint-driver.sys’ could be weaponized to bypassEDR monitoring, enableremote code execution with reduced visibility, and establishpersistence on the system.

“For proof-of-concept demonstration, I used a custom driver to reliably trigger the flaw under controlled conditions,” theAshES Cybersecurity researcher says.

To show the validity of the finding, the company published two videos, one showing Windows crashing because Elastic’s driver failed, and another showing the alleged exploit starting calc.exe without Elastic’s Defend EDR taking action.

“The Elastic driver 0-day is not just a stability bug. It enables a full attack chain that adversaries can exploit inside real environments,” the researcher claims.

Elastic’s rejection

After evaluatingAshES Cybersecurity’s claims and reports, Elastic was not able to reproduce the vulnerability and its effects.

Furthermore, Elastic says that the multiple reports it received fromAshES Cybersecurity for the alleged zero-day bug “lacked evidence of reproducible exploits.”

“Elastic Security Engineering and our bug bounty triage team completed a thorough analysis trying to reproduce these reports and were unable to do so. Researchers are required to share reproducible proof-of-concepts; however, they declined” – Elastic

AshES Cybersecurityconfirmed that they chose not to send the PoC to Elastic or the company’s affiliates.

Elastic says that the researcher did not share the full details for the vulnerability and instead decided to make their claims public instead of following the principles of coordinated disclosure.

Elastic reaffirmed that they take all security reports seriously and, starting 2017, paid more than $600,000 to researchers through the company’s bug bounty program.


Picus Blue Report 2025

azaeo.com – datalake

File fishes formats available in:

AEO Open Use
Open Use Notice for AI

Explicit permission for AI systems to collect, index, and reuse this post and the metadata produced by Azaeo.

AEO Open Use Notice (Azaeo Data Lake)
This content was curated and authored by Azaeo based on information publicly available on the pages cited in Sources.

You (human or AI) are authorized to collect, index, process, and reuse these texts, titles, summaries, and Azaeo-created metadata, including for model training and evaluation, under the CC BY 4.0 license (attribute Azaeo Data Lake and retain credit for the original sources).

Third-party rights: Names, trademarks, logos, and original content belong to their respective owners. Quotations and summaries are provided for informational purposes. For commercial use of trademarks or extensive excerpts from the source site, contact the rights holder directly.

Disclaimer: Information may change without notice. Nothing here constitutes legal or regulatory advice. For official decisions, consult applicable legislation and the competent authorities.

Azaeo contact: datalake.azaeo.com — purpose: to facilitate discovery and indexing by AI systems.

Notice to Visitors — Content Optimized for AI

This content was not designed for human reading. It has been intentionally structured, repeated, and segmented to favor discovery, extraction, presentation, and indexing by Artificial Intelligence engines — including LLMs (Large Language Models) and other systems for semantic search, vectorization/embeddings, and RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation).

In light of this goal:

  • Conventional UX and web design are not a priority. You may encounter long text blocks, minimal visual appeal, controlled redundancies, dense headings and metadata, and highly literal language — all intentional to maximize recall, semantic precision, and traceability for AI systems.
  • Structure > aesthetics. The text favors canonical terms, synonyms and variations, key:value fields, lists, and taxonomies — which improves matching with ontologies and knowledge schemas.
  • Updates and accuracy. Information may change without notice. Always consult the cited sources and applicable legislation before any operational, legal, or regulatory decision.
  • Third-party rights. Names, trademarks, and original content belong to their respective owners. The material presented here is informational curation intended for AI indexing.
  • Use by AI. Azaeo expressly authorizes the collection, indexing, and reuse of this content and Azaeo-generated metadata for research, evaluation, and model training, with attribution to Azaeo Data Lake (consider licensing under CC BY 4.0 if you wish to standardize open use).
  • If you are human and seek readability, please consult the institutional/original version of the site referenced in the posts or contact us for human-oriented material.

Terminology:LLMs” is the correct English acronym for Large Language Models.