DEV Community

Cover image for CVE-2026-24307 | M365 Copilot Information Disclosure Vulnerability
Aakash Rahsi
Aakash Rahsi

Posted on

CVE-2026-24307 | M365 Copilot Information Disclosure Vulnerability

Read Complete Article ## | https://www.aakashrahsi.online/post/cve-2026-24307

If you’re running Copilot in production, you already know the uncomfortable truth:

AI doesn’t “leak” data.

Your tenant leaks data — and AI makes the leak feel intelligent.

CVE-2026-24307 | M365 Copilot Information Disclosure Vulnerability is not “just another CVE.”

It’s a live exam for every organization claiming to be Copilot-ready.

Microsoft is doing the right thing by disclosing and patching.

But here’s the part most teams miss:

The most dangerous version of this CVE is not “Copilot is broken.”

It’s: Copilot is working exactly as designed — on permissions you forgot you granted.

MSRC reference: https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-24307


TL;DR (for busy leaders)

If Copilot can surface out-of-scope content, one of these is usually true:

  • Your identity boundary is too wide (users, apps, devices, sessions)
  • Your content boundary is too wide (SharePoint/OneDrive/Teams sprawl, broken inheritance, oversharing)
  • Your policy boundary is too weak (Purview labeling/DLP not enforced where Copilot reads)
  • Your telemetry boundary is too quiet (no “Copilot-sensitive” detections, no proof trail)

So your response should be simple and brutal:

Shrink what Copilot can see, prove what changed, and keep it from drifting back.


Why this CVE lands harder than most “Info Disclosure” issues

Copilot changes the risk shape:

  • It turns permission mistakes into confident answers
  • It compresses search + synthesis into a single user action
  • It makes “I didn’t know that doc existed” irrelevant — because Copilot can find it for you
  • It increases the chance that sensitive fragments get repeated into chats, emails, notes, tickets

This is why the real control plane isn’t “AI settings.”

It’s:

Identity → Permissions → Labels → Session Controls → Telemetry → Proof


The Rahsi Copilot Boundary Model (the only model that matters in production)

Think of Copilot as a high-speed retrieval engine sitting on top of:

1) Identity Plane (who is asking)

  • Entra ID user risk, sign-in risk
  • Device compliance (Intune)
  • Conditional Access (CA) session conditions
  • Privileged identity controls (PIM / role activation hygiene)

2) Content Plane (what exists)

  • SharePoint sites, libraries, Teams-connected sites
  • OneDrive sprawl
  • External sharing links
  • Old content with new access
  • Broken inheritance and “Everyone except external users” accidents

3) Policy Plane (what’s allowed)

  • Purview sensitivity labels
  • DLP policies (M365 + Endpoint DLP where needed)
  • Insider risk signals and comms compliance where applicable
  • Information barriers (if relevant to your org structure)

4) Telemetry Plane (what you can prove)

  • Unified Audit Log
  • Purview activity
  • Defender XDR signals
  • Sentinel detections and hunting
  • “Evidence-ready” proof pack for auditors and customers

If any one of those planes is weak, Copilot will feel unsafe — even if the CVE is patched.


What “good” looks like: Copilot-safe by design

A. Shrink the highest-risk exposure first (fast wins in hours, not weeks)

1) Kill overshared content at the source

  • Find sites with “broad groups” and legacy sharing patterns
  • Fix broken inheritance and accidental wide audiences
  • Reduce “anyone with the link” exposures where business allows

2) Ring-fence crown-jewel locations
Create a simple tiering model:

  • Tier 0: secrets, legal, HR, finance, identity ops
  • Tier 1: customer data, contracts, regulated content
  • Tier 2: normal collaboration

Then enforce:

  • stricter membership
  • stricter sharing
  • stricter labeling requirements

3) Make external sharing a deliberate act

  • Time-bound sharing links by default
  • Require MFA for guests
  • Apply CA for guest access (device + session constraints where possible)

B. Make Copilot obey your information protection truth

4) Sensitivity labels must be real, not decorative
Labels must drive:

  • encryption or access restrictions (where needed)
  • container labeling (SharePoint sites / Teams)
  • user prompts and policy outcomes

5) DLP must match how Copilot is actually used
DLP should consider:

  • copying sensitive outputs into chats
  • pasting into tickets
  • emailing summarized data out of protected contexts

The goal isn’t to block everything.

The goal is: prevent high-impact leakage paths while keeping collaboration fast.


C. Harden the session where Copilot answers are produced

6) Conditional Access is your “answer quality gate”
For high-risk contexts:

  • require compliant device
  • require phishing-resistant auth where feasible
  • reduce session lifetime for risky scenarios
  • apply step-up for sensitive access paths

If the session is weak, the answers become risky.


CVE Surge Mode (the one switch every tenant should have)

When a Copilot disclosure CVE drops, your tenant should visibly change behavior for a short period.

Your surge mode should do three things:

1) Tighten high-risk access

  • stricter CA for Copilot-enabled workloads
  • restrict unmanaged devices for sensitive sites
  • reduce standing privileges for admins and content owners

2) Freeze permission expansion

  • no new broad-access groups
  • no new “open” sites or libraries
  • no new high-privilege connectors or automations touching sensitive content

3) Capture proof while you move

  • baseline snapshots (before)
  • change evidence (during)
  • validation evidence (after)

If you can’t show deltas, you didn’t really respond — you just forwarded an advisory.


The Proof-Pack (what auditors and customers actually want)

When someone asks, “Are we safe from CVE-2026-24307?”

Your best answer is not a paragraph.

It’s a one-pack story:

  • Scope: where Copilot is enabled
  • Exposure: top oversharing fixes performed
  • Policy: labeling + DLP enforcement posture
  • Identity: CA posture + device compliance requirements
  • Telemetry: detections + hunting queries
  • Validation: spot checks + post-change confirmation

The win condition is simple:

You can explain your Copilot boundary in one page — and defend it in one hour.


The calm truth (and why Microsoft will respect this approach)

This is pro-Microsoft, because it’s how the platform is meant to be run:

  • Microsoft gives you identity controls (Entra + CA)
  • Microsoft gives you device truth (Intune)
  • Microsoft gives you information protection (Purview)
  • Microsoft gives you detection (Defender + Sentinel)

CVE-2026-24307 is the moment you connect them into one control plane.

Not fear. Not drama.

Just clean architecture.


If you want the “done-for-you” version

If you want, I can help you implement a full Copilot Boundary Blueprint:

  • tenant-wide exposure map
  • crown-jewel containment lanes
  • CA + device posture gates
  • Purview label/DLP alignment
  • Sentinel detections + a proof-pack that survives audit season

If you’re building Copilot for real, you don’t need more content.

You need control.

— Aakash Rahsi

Top comments (0)