Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Microsoft Visual Studio

Microsoft Visual Studio Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

visualstudio.com

The most comprehensive IDE for .NET and C++ developers on Windows. Fully packed with a sweet array of tools and features to elevate and enhance every stage of software development.


MVS A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

MVS
Company Information
Website:http://www.visualstudio.com
Employees number:3
Number of followers:222,838
NAICS:5112
Industry Type:Software Development
Homepage:visualstudio.com
MVS Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 700 and 749
logo
MVSSoftware Development
Updated:
25/06/2026
723/1000
Moderate
Ba
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
MVS Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
MVSSoftware Development
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

MVS
MVSModerate
Current Score
723Ba (MODERATE)
01000
3 incidents
-10 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
AUGUST 2026
725Before Incident
JULY 2026
724Before Incident
JUNE 2026
728Before Incident
Vulnerability
01 Jun 2026MVS
Microsoft: What the Visual Studio Code Vulnerability Reveals About AI Tooling Risk

Critical VS Code MCP Vulnerability Exposes Developers to Silent Attacks

723After Incident
CRITICAL-5
MIC1782398423
Critical VS Code MCP Vulnerability Exposes Developers to Silent Attacks A newly disclosed vulnerability in Visual Studio Code’s Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration tracked as CVE-2026-41613 allows attackers to execute malicious code or hijack developer sessions with a single click. Discovered by the Oasis Security Research Team, the flaw exploits a hidden trust boundary in VS Code’s MCP install flow, where critical configuration fields are silently persisted without user visibility. ### How the Attack Works MCP, a standard for extending AI coding assistants, enables seamless integration with version control, cloud services, and other developer tools. When users install an MCP configuration via a link, VS Code displays a preview dialog but this interface omits five key fields: environment variables, environment files, HTTP headers, working directory settings, and developer flags. Attackers can embed malicious payloads in these hidden fields, which execute automatically upon installation. Two primary attack vectors were identified: 1. Remote Code Execution (RCE): By injecting malicious environment variables (e.g., `NODE_OPTIONS` with `--import`), attackers gain persistent control over the developer’s machine, surviving reboots. 2. Session Hijacking: Hidden HTTP authorization headers allow attackers to redirect the developer’s AI assistant to operate under their credentials, with no visible authentication prompts. ### Scope and Impact The vulnerability affects VS Code versions prior to 1.119.1, where MCP is natively supported. Since MCP links are commonly shared via GitHub repositories, forums, and documentation, the attack requires no phishing or browser exploits just a single click on a seemingly legitimate link. This incident follows recent disclosures of similar risks in AI tools (e.g., OpenClaw, Claude AI), highlighting a broader pattern: AI assistants, granted broad access to credentials and production systems, rely on thin UI-based trust boundaries that adversaries can exploit. ### Response and Mitigation Microsoft released a patch in VS Code 1.119.1, but organizations must also: - Audit existing MCP configurations for hidden fields (e.g., `env`, `envFile`, `headers`) in `mcp.json` files. - Inventory AI tooling to identify which MCP servers and agents are active across developer environments. - Enforce governance for AI agent identities, treating them with the same rigor as human users (e.g., policy enforcement, audit trails). The incident underscores the expanding attack surface of AI-powered developer tools, where trust in interfaces often outpaces security controls. Most organizations currently lack visibility into what these tools do or on whose behalf.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Vulnerability Exploitation
IMPACT
Systems Affected: Developer machines with VS Code versions prior to 1.119.1Operational Impact: Persistent control over developer machines, session hijackingBrand Reputation Impact: Potential erosion of trust in AI-powered developer tools
MAY 2026
749Before Incident
Cyber Attack
18 May 2026MVS
GitHub, npm, Microsoft and Nx: Nx Console VS Code Extension Compromised to Steal Developer and Cloud Secrets

Nx Console VS Code Extension Compromised in Sophisticated Supply Chain Attack

727After Incident
CRITICAL-22
NPMGITNXPMIC1779193496
Nx Console VS Code Extension Compromised in Sophisticated Supply Chain Attack In May 2026, attackers hijacked the widely used Nx Console Visual Studio Code extension, turning it into a credential-stealing tool that exposed millions of developers. The malicious version (18.95.0) of the extension installed over 2.2 million times was published to the official VS Code Marketplace on May 18 using stolen credentials. The attack unfolded in stages, beginning with an earlier breach that compromised a contributor’s GitHub personal access token. At 03:18 UTC, the attacker pushed an orphan commit to the nrwl/nx repository, replacing its contents with just two files: a package.json and an obfuscated index.js payload. By 12:36 UTC, the malicious extension was live, injecting a 2,777-byte backdoor into its main.js file. The payload activated the moment a developer opened any workspace. Within 11 minutes, the Nx team detected and removed the compromised version, but the damage was already done. The malware targeted a broad range of credentials, including tokens from GitHub, npm, AWS, HashiCorp Vault, Kubernetes, and 1Password, as well as Claude AI coding assistant configurations one of the first known supply chain attacks to exploit AI tooling. Stolen data was exfiltrated via HTTPS, GitHub API abuse, and DNS tunneling, ensuring redundancy if one channel was blocked. On macOS, the payload installed a persistent Python backdoor (~/.local/share/kitty/cat.py) that checked in hourly for new commands, signed with a 4096-bit RSA key. The malware also employed anti-analysis techniques, avoiding execution on machines with fewer than four CPU cores or those in Russian/CIS time zones to evade detection. The attack leveraged Sigstore integration, allowing the attacker to forge cryptographically signed npm packages using stolen OIDC tokens, making malicious packages appear legitimate. Security firm StepSecurity confirmed this was the second supply chain incident targeting the Nx ecosystem in a year. Developers who installed version 18.95.0 and opened a workspace between 12:36 and 12:47 UTC on May 18 should assume all credentials on the affected machine were compromised. The Nx team released a patched version (18.100.0) and provided indicators of compromise (IoCs) for detection, including file hashes, Git commit SHAs, and exfiltration endpoints.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain Attack
MOTIVATION
Credential theftData exfiltrationSupply chain compromise
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Credentials (GitHub, npm, AWS, HashiCorp Vault, Kubernetes, 1Password, Claude AI), developer workspace dataSystems Affected: Developer machines with Nx Console VS Code extension (version 18.95.0)Operational Impact: Developers required to rotate all credentials, potential unauthorized access to cloud resources and repositoriesBrand Reputation Impact: High (second supply chain incident in a year for Nx ecosystem)Identity Theft Risk: High (stolen credentials could lead to further breaches)
DATA BREACH
CredentialsDeveloper workspace dataAI tooling configurations (Claude AI)Sensitivity Of Data: High (cloud access tokens, API keys, PII in developer workspaces)Personally Identifiable Information: Potential (depending on developer workspace contents)
APRIL 2026
749Before Incident
MARCH 2026
748Before Incident
FEBRUARY 2026
748Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
775Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
775Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
775Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
775Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
750Before Incident
Vulnerability
01 Sep 2025MVS
npm and Microsoft: Malicious VS Code AI Extensions with 1.5 Million Installs Steal Developer Source Code

Malicious VS Code Extensions Exfiltrate Developer Data to China-Based Servers and JavaScript Package Managers Vulnerable to Supply Chain Attacks

747After Incident
CRITICAL-3
NPMMIC1769475520
Malicious VS Code Extensions Exfiltrate Developer Data to China-Based Servers Cybersecurity researchers have uncovered two malicious Visual Studio Code (VS Code) extensions masquerading as AI-powered coding assistants while secretly harvesting developer data and transmitting it to servers in China. The extensions, still available on the official Visual Studio Marketplace, have amassed a combined 1.5 million installs: - ChatGPT - 中文版 (whensunset.chatgpt-china) – 1.34 million installs - ChatGPT - ChatMoss (CodeMoss) (zhukunpeng.chat-moss) – 151,751 installs Dubbed MaliciousCorgi by Koi Security, the extensions function as advertised providing autocomplete suggestions and code error explanations while covertly exfiltrating data. Every opened file and code modification is encoded in Base64 and sent to a China-based server (aihao123[.]cn) without user consent. The malware also includes a real-time monitoring feature, remotely triggered to exfiltrate up to 50 workspace files per session. Additionally, the extensions embed a hidden zero-pixel iframe loading four Chinese analytics SDKs Zhuge.io, GrowingIO, TalkingData, and Baidu Analytics to fingerprint devices and build detailed user profiles. ### JavaScript Package Managers Vulnerable to Supply Chain Attacks In a separate disclosure, Koi Security identified six zero-day vulnerabilities (collectively named PackageGate) in JavaScript package managers npm, pnpm, vlt, and Bun that bypass security controls designed to prevent malicious script execution during package installation. These flaws undermine defenses like `--ignore-scripts` and lockfile integrity checks, which were introduced after the Shai-Hulud worm exploited postinstall scripts to hijack npm tokens. Following responsible disclosure, fixes were implemented in: - pnpm (v10.26.0) – Tracked as CVE-2025-69264 (CVSS 8.8) and CVE-2025-69263 (CVSS 7.5) - vlt (v1.0.0-rc.10) - Bun (v1.3.5) However, npm has declined to patch the issue, stating that users are responsible for vetting package content. GitHub, npm’s parent company, confirmed it is actively addressing the flaw but emphasized that git dependencies inherently trust repository contents, including configuration files. GitHub has also reinforced supply chain security measures, including deprecating legacy tokens, enforcing shorter expiration for granular tokens, and removing 2FA bypass options for local package publishing. As of September 2025, organizations remain advised to disable scripts and commit lockfiles, though researchers warn these measures alone may not fully mitigate risks until PackageGate is resolved.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain AttackData Exfiltration
MOTIVATION
Data TheftSupply Chain Compromise
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Developer workspace files, code modifications, device fingerprints, user profilesVS Code ExtensionsnpmpnpmvltBunOperational Impact: Potential unauthorized access to sensitive codebases and developer environmentsBrand Reputation Impact: Potential erosion of trust in VS Code Marketplace and JavaScript package managersIdentity Theft Risk: High (device fingerprinting and user profiling)
DATA BREACH
Workspace filesCode modificationsDevice fingerprintsUser profilesSensitivity Of Data: High (developer codebases, PII via analytics SDKs)Data Exfiltration: Base64-encoded files sent to aihao123[.]cnData Encryption: Base64 encoding (not encryption)Personally Identifiable Information: Device fingerprints, user profiles (via Zhuge.io, GrowingIO, TalkingData, Baidu Analytics)

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for MVS ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in June 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on MVS's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with MVS ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view MVS's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
Microsoft Visual Studio Cyber Scoring History | Rankiteo