| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The default configuration for the domain name resolver for Microsoft Windows 98, NT 4.0, 2000, and XP sets the QueryIpMatching parameter to 0, which causes Windows to accept DNS updates from hosts that it did not query, which allows remote attackers to poison the DNS cache. |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Help and Support Center for Microsoft Windows Me allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary script in the Local Computer security context via an hcp:// URL with the malicious script in the topic parameter. |
| The URL parser in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 5.1 on Windows XP Professional SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via multiple requests to ".dll" followed by arguments such as "~0" through "~9", which causes ntdll.dll to produce a return value that is not correctly handled by IIS, as demonstrated using "/_vti_bin/.dll/*/~0". NOTE: the consequence was originally believed to be only a denial of service (application crash and reboot). |
| Buffer overflow in the Windows Shell function in Microsoft Windows XP allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an .MP3 or .WMA audio file with a corrupt custom attribute, aka "Unchecked Buffer in Windows Shell Could Enable System Compromise." |
| Unspecified vulnerability in Internet Explorer 6.0 on Microsoft Windows XP SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via "exceptional conditions" that trigger memory corruption, as demonstrated using an exception handler and nested object tags, a variant of CVE-2006-1992. |
| Windows Firewall in Microsoft Windows XP SP2 produces incorrect application block alerts when the application filename is ".exe" (with no characters before the "."), which might allow local user-assisted users to trick a user into unblocking a Trojan horse program, as demonstrated by a malicious ".exe" program in a folder named "Internet Explorer," which triggers a question about whether to unblock the "Internet Explorer" program. |
| COM+ in Microsoft Windows does not properly "create and use memory structures," which allows local users or remote attackers to execute arbitrary code. |
| The DCOM RPC interface for Microsoft Windows NT 4.0, 2000, XP, and Server 2003 allows remote attackers to cause network communications via an "alter context" call that contains additional data, aka the "Object Identity Vulnerability." |
| Buffer overflow in the Web Client service (WebClnt.dll) for Microsoft Windows XP SP1 and SP2, and Server 2003 up to SP1, allows remote authenticated users or Guests to execute arbitrary code via crafted RPC requests, a different vulnerability than CVE-2005-1207. |
| The SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) component of Microsoft Windows XP 64-bit Edition, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2003 64-bit Edition, and the Exchange Routing Engine component of Exchange Server 2003, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a malicious DNS response message containing length values that are not properly validated. |
| Unspecified vulnerability in Windows Explorer in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 and SP2, and Server 2003 SP1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via attack vectors involving COM objects and "crafted files and directories," aka the "Windows Shell Vulnerability." |
| An Activation function in the RPCSS Service involved with DCOM activation for Microsoft Windows 2000, XP, and 2003 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via an activation request with a large length field. |
| 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. |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in the Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) interface in the RPCSS Service allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a malformed DCERPC DCOM object activation request packet with modified length fields, a different vulnerability than CVE-2003-0352 (Blaster/Nachi) and CVE-2003-0528. |
| The Messenger Service for Windows NT through Server 2003 does not properly verify the length of the message, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a buffer overflow attack. |
| Sign extension vulnerability in the createBrushIndirect function in the GDI library (gdi32.dll) in Microsoft Windows XP, Server 2003, and possibly other versions, allows user-assisted attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted WMF file. |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in the Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) interface in the RPCSS Service allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a malformed RPC request with a long filename parameter, a different vulnerability than CVE-2003-0352 (Blaster/Nachi) and CVE-2003-0715. |
| 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. |
| The NetBT Name Service (NBNS) for NetBIOS in Windows NT 4.0, 2000, XP, and Server 2003 may include random memory in a response to a NBNS query, which could allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive information. |
| mshtml.dll in Microsoft Windows XP, Server 2003, and Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (access violation) by causing mshtml.dll to process button-focus events at the same time that a document is reloading, as seen in Microsoft Office InfoPath 2003 by repeatedly clicking the "Delete" button in a repeating section in a form. NOTE: the normal operation of InfoPath appears to involve a local user without any privilege boundaries, so this might not be a vulnerability in InfoPath. If no realistic scenarios exist for this problem in other products, then perhaps it should be excluded from CVE. |
