| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The TCP/IP stack in multiple operating systems allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via a TCP packet with the correct sequence number but the wrong Acknowledgement number, which generates a large number of "keep alive" packets. NOTE: some followups indicate that this issue could not be replicated. |
| Stack-based buffer overflow in WINSRV.DLL in the Client Server Runtime System (CSRSS) process of Microsoft Windows 2000, Windows XP SP1 and SP2, and Windows Server 2003 allows local users to gain privileges via a specially-designed application that provides console window information with a long FaceName value. |
| The kernel for Microsoft Windows Server 2003 does not reset certain values in CPU data structures, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (system crash) via a malicious program. |
| The document processing application used by the Windows Shell in Microsoft Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by modifying the CLSID stored in a file so that it is processed by HTML Application Host (MSHTA), as demonstrated using a Microsoft Word document. |
| The License Logging service for Windows NT Server, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows Server 2003 does not properly validate the length of messages, which leads to an "unchecked buffer" and allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code, aka the "License Logging Service Vulnerability." |
| Buffer overflow in the Remote Access Connection Manager service (RASMAN) service in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 and SP2, and Server 2003 SP1 and earlier allows remote unauthenticated or authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via certain crafted "RPC related requests," that lead to registry corruption and stack corruption, aka the "RASMAN Registry Corruption Vulnerability." |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in winhlp32.exe in Windows NT, Windows 2000 through SP4, Windows XP through SP2, and Windows 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted .hlp file. |
| The WINS service (wins.exe) on Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0, Windows 2000 Server, and Windows Server 2003 allows remote attackers to write to arbitrary memory locations and possibly execute arbitrary code via a modified memory pointer in a WINS replication packet to TCP port 42, aka the "Association Context Vulnerability." |
| The Windows Animated Cursor (ANI) capability in Windows NT, Windows 2000 through SP4, Windows XP through SP1, and Windows 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the AnimationHeaderBlock length field, which leads to a stack-based buffer overflow. |
| Buffer overflow in Microsoft Windows 2000, Windows XP SP1 and SP2, and Windows Server 2003 allows local users to cause a denial of service (i.e., system crash) via a malformed request, aka "Object Management Vulnerability". |
| Directory traversal vulnerability in the "Shell Folders" capability in Microsoft Windows Server 2003 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via .. (dot dot) sequences in a "shell:" link. |
| Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0 Converter (MSWRD632.WPC), as used in WordPad, does not properly validate certain data lengths, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a .wri, .rtf, and .doc file sent by email or malicious web site, aka "Font Conversion Vulnerability," a different vulnerability than CVE-2004-0571. |
| The Windows Internet Naming Service (WINS) for Microsoft Windows Server 2003, and possibly Windows NT and Server 2000, does not properly validate the length of certain packets, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code. |
| Buffer overflow in the DNS Client service in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 and SP2, and Server 2003 SP1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted record response. NOTE: while MS06-041 implies that there is a single issue, there are multiple vectors, and likely multiple vulnerabilities, related to (1) a heap-based buffer overflow in a DNS server response to the client, (2) a DNS server response with malformed ATMA records, and (3) a length miscalculation in TXT, HINFO, X25, and ISDN records. |
| Stack-based buffer overflow in the PCHealth system in the Help and Support Center function in Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long query in an HCP URL. |
| The ShellAbout API call in Korean Input Method Editor (IME) in Korean versions of Microsoft Windows XP SP1 and SP2, Windows Server 2003 up to SP1, and Office 2003, allows local users to gain privileges by launching the "shell about dialog box" and clicking the "End-User License Agreement" link, which executes Notepad with the privileges of the program that displays the about box. |
| The Windows Graphical Device Interface library (GDI32.DLL) in Microsoft Windows allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a Windows Metafile (WMF) format image with a crafted SETABORTPROC GDI Escape function call, related to the Windows Picture and Fax Viewer (SHIMGVW.DLL), a different vulnerability than CVE-2005-2123 and CVE-2005-2124, and as originally discovered in the wild on unionseek.com. |
| Buffer overflow in the Routing and Remote Access service (RRAS) in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 and SP2, and Server 2003 SP1 and earlier allows remote unauthenticated or authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via certain crafted "RPC related requests," aka the "RRAS Memory Corruption Vulnerability." |
| The SynAttackProtect protection in Microsoft Windows 2003 before SP1 and Windows 2000 before SP4 with Update Roll-up uses a hash of predictable data, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via a flood of SYN packets that produce identical hash values, which slows down the hash table lookups. |
| NOTE: this issue has been disputed by third parties. Microsoft Windows XP, 2000, and 2003 allows local users to kill a writable process by using the CreateRemoteThread function with certain arguments on a process that has been opened using the OpenProcess function, possibly involving an invalid address for the start routine. NOTE: followup posts have disputed this issue, saying that if a user already has privileges to write to a process, then other functions could be called or the process could be terminated using PROCESS_TERMINATE |
