CVE-2005-1052
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 · uneditedMicrosoft Outlook 2003 and Outlook Web Access (OWA) 2003 do not properly display comma separated addresses in the From field in an e-mail message, which could allow remote attackers to spoof e-mail addresses.
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 analysis · high confidenceMicrosoft Outlook 2003 and Outlook Web Access (OWA) 2003 fail to properly parse and display comma-separated addresses in the From field of email messages. This allows an attacker to craft emails with a spoofed sender address by manipulating the comma-separated address format, causing the client to display a different address than the actual sender.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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= 2003= 2003CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed Outlook versionOpen Outlook, go to Help > About Microsoft Outlook. The version number for 2003 is 11.x (build numbers like 11.5608, 11.6612, etc.)Affected if The version shown is 11.x (Outlook 2003)
-
Check OWA versionIf using Exchange 2003 with OWA, check the Exchange server version. OWA 2003 runs on Exchange Server 2003.Affected if The OWA component is from Exchange Server 2003
-
Inspect From field in received emailsView the full email headers of a test message. Look at the From: header line - check if it contains multiple comma-separated email addresses that may display differently than the actual senderAffected if The From header contains comma-separated addresses where the displayed address differs from the actual sender address in the envelope
-
Verify email authentication statusCheck email headers for SPF, DKIM, and DMARC results. Look for Authentication-Results header fields.Affected if No SPF, DKIM, or DMARC validation is performed on incoming messages, allowing spoofed emails to pass through
A user is affected if they are running exactly Outlook 2003 (version 11.x) or OWA 2003 and the mail system lacks proper authentication checks to detect spoofed comma-separated From addresses.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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.
From vendor dataApply Microsoft security updates for Outlook 2003 and OWA 2003, or upgrade to newer supported versions. Implement email authentication mechanisms (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) at the mail gateway level to detect and block spoofed messages.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-1052 — 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-2005-1052 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