| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Windows SharePoint Services and SharePoint Team Services for Windows Server 2003 does not properly validate an HTTP redirection query, which allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTML and web script via a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack, or to spoof the web cache. |
| 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." |
| The Server service (srvsvc.dll) in Windows XP SP1 and SP2 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information (users who are accessing resources) via an anonymous logon using a named pipe, which is not properly authenticated, aka the "Named Pipe Vulnerability." |
| Internet Explorer 5.01, 5.5, and 6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via drag and drop events, aka the "Drag-and-Drop Vulnerability." |
| Internet Explorer 5.01, 5.5, and 6 allows remote attackers to spoof a less restrictive security zone and execute arbitrary code via an HTML page containing URLs that contain hostnames that have been double hex encoded, which are decoded twice to generate a malicious hostname, aka the "URL Decoding Zone Spoofing Vulnerability." |
| Internet Explorer 5.01, 5.5, and 6 does not properly validate buffers when handling certain DHTML methods including the createControlRange Javascript function, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code, aka the "DHTML Method Heap Memory Corruption Vulnerability." |
| Internet Explorer 5.01, 5.5, and 6 does not properly validate certain URLs in Channel Definition Format (CDF) files, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or execute arbitrary code, aka the "Channel Definition Format (CDF) Cross Domain Vulnerability." |
| Synaesthesia 2.1 and earlier, and possibly other versions, when installed setuid root, does not drop privileges before processing configuration and mixer files, which allows local users to read arbitrary files. |
| The Hyperlink Object Library for Windows 98, 2000, XP, and Server 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted link that triggers an "unchecked buffer" in the library, possibly due to a buffer overflow. |
| Buffer overflow in the Telephony Application Programming Interface (TAPI) for Microsoft Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, Windows ME, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003 allows attackers to elevate privileges or execute arbitrary code via a crafted message. |
| Buffer overflow in the Message Queuing component of Microsoft Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted message. |
| Buffer overflow in the font processing component of Microsoft Windows 2000, Windows XP SP1 and SP2, and Windows Server 2003 allows local users to gain privileges via a specially-designed application. |
| The kernel of Microsoft Windows 2000, Windows XP SP1 and SP2, and Windows Server 2003 allows local users to gain privileges via certain access requests. |
| 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. |
| Buffer overflow in the Decrypt::makeFileKey2 function in Decrypt.cc for xpdf 3.00 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a PDF file with a large /Encrypt /Length keyLength value. |
| zhcon before 0.2 does not drop privileges before reading a user configuration file, which allows local users to read arbitrary files. |
| The original design of TCP does not check that the TCP sequence number in an ICMP error message is within the range of sequence numbers for data that has been sent but not acknowledged (aka "TCP sequence number checking"), which makes it easier for attackers to forge ICMP error messages for specific TCP connections and cause a denial of service, as demonstrated using (1) blind connection-reset attacks with forged "Destination Unreachable" messages, (2) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged "Source Quench" messages, or (3) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged ICMP messages that cause the Path MTU to be reduced. NOTE: CVE-2004-0790, CVE-2004-0791, and CVE-2004-1060 have been SPLIT based on different attacks; CVE-2005-0065, CVE-2005-0066, CVE-2005-0067, and CVE-2005-0068 are related identifiers that are SPLIT based on the underlying vulnerability. While CVE normally SPLITs based on vulnerability, the attack-based identifiers exist due to the variety and number of affected implementations and solutions that address the attacks instead of the underlying vulnerabilities. |
| The original design of TCP does not check that the TCP Acknowledgement number in an ICMP error message generated by an intermediate router is within the range of possible values for data that has already been acknowledged (aka "TCP acknowledgement number checking"), which makes it easier for attackers to forge ICMP error messages for specific TCP connections and cause a denial of service, as demonstrated using (1) blind connection-reset attacks with forged "Destination Unreachable" messages, (2) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged "Source Quench" messages, or (3) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged ICMP messages that cause the Path MTU to be reduced. NOTE: CVE-2004-0790, CVE-2004-0791, and CVE-2004-1060 have been SPLIT based on different attacks; CVE-2005-0065, CVE-2005-0066, CVE-2005-0067, and CVE-2005-0068 are related identifiers that are SPLIT based on the underlying vulnerability. While CVE normally SPLITs based on vulnerability, the attack-based identifiers exist due to the variety and number of affected implementations and solutions that address the attacks instead of the underlying vulnerabilities. |
| The original design of TCP does not require that port numbers be assigned randomly (aka "Port randomization"), which makes it easier for attackers to forge ICMP error messages for specific TCP connections and cause a denial of service, as demonstrated using (1) blind connection-reset attacks with forged "Destination Unreachable" messages, (2) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged "Source Quench" messages, or (3) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged ICMP messages that cause the Path MTU to be reduced. NOTE: CVE-2004-0790, CVE-2004-0791, and CVE-2004-1060 have been SPLIT based on different attacks; CVE-2005-0065, CVE-2005-0066, CVE-2005-0067, and CVE-2005-0068 are related identifiers that are SPLIT based on the underlying vulnerability. While CVE normally SPLITs based on vulnerability, the attack-based identifiers exist due to the variety and number of affected implementations and solutions that address the attacks instead of the underlying vulnerabilities. |
| The original design of ICMP does not require authentication for host-generated ICMP error messages, which makes it easier for attackers to forge ICMP error messages for specific TCP connections and cause a denial of service, as demonstrated using (1) blind connection-reset attacks with forged "Destination Unreachable" messages, (2) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged "Source Quench" messages, or (3) blind throughput-reduction attacks with forged ICMP messages that cause the Path MTU to be reduced. NOTE: CVE-2004-0790, CVE-2004-0791, and CVE-2004-1060 have been SPLIT based on different attacks; CVE-2005-0065, CVE-2005-0066, CVE-2005-0067, and CVE-2005-0068 are related identifiers that are SPLIT based on the underlying vulnerability. While CVE normally SPLITs based on vulnerability, the attack-based identifiers exist due to the variety and number of affected implementations and solutions that address the attacks instead of the underlying vulnerabilities. |
