CVE-2004-0574
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP) component of Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0, Windows 2000 Server, Windows Server 2003, Exchange 2000 Server, and Exchange Server 2003 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via XPAT patterns, possibly related to improper length validation and an "unchecked buffer," leading to off-by-one and heap-based buffer overflows.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisThe program writes past the bounds of a buffer, overwriting adjacent memory an attacker can turn to their advantage. Crafted input can overwrite control data and redirect execution. Remediation is validating every index and length before a write, plus modern memory-safety mitigations.
General guidance for the out-of-bounds write class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 2000= 2003all versions= 4.0= r2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedExchange Server 2019 or Exchange Online (Microsoft 365); Windows Server 2019 or later
- 1. Migrate from Exchange 2000/2003 to Exchange Server 2019 or Exchange Online (Microsoft 365), as Exchange 2000/2003 reached end of support in 2010 and 2014 respectively
- 2. Migrate from Windows Server 2003 to Windows Server 2019 or later; Windows Server 2003 reached end of support in July 2015
- 3. If running Windows 2000 or Windows NT 4.0 servers, decommission these systems as they are end-of-life and no longer receive security updates
- 4. Ensure the new Exchange Server deployment has the latest security updates and cumulative updates installed
- 5. After migration, verify NNTP services are properly secured or disabled if not needed
- 6. Apply the MS04-038 security patch if legacy systems must remain temporarily (only as a temporary mitigation, not a long-term solution)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-0574 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2004-0574 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data