Windows 2000Operating system · Microsoft

CVE-2005-1184

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v2.0 Published 2005-05-02
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
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.

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 · moderate confidence

A vulnerability in the TCP/IP stack of multiple operating systems allows remote attackers to cause denial of service by sending TCP packets with the correct sequence number but incorrect acknowledgement number, triggering excessive keep-alive packet generation and CPU consumption.

MitigationApply vendor patches for the affected operating systems; implement network-level filtering or IDS rules to detect and block anomalous TCP packets with mismatched sequence/acknowledgement numbers.

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
Windows 2000Operating system
Affected:all versions
Windows 2003 ServerOperating system
Affected:= datacenter_64-bit= enterprise= enterprise_64-bit= r2= standard= standard_64-bit= web
Windows 98seOperating system
Affected:all versions
Windows NtOperating system
Affected:= 4.0
Windows XpOperating system
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
None
Availability
Partial

AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the Windows version
    Run 'winver' or check System Properties to determine the exact Windows version and build number
    Affected if The system is running Windows 2000 (any version), Windows 2003 Server (any affected edition), Windows 98se, Windows NT 4.0, or Windows XP (any version)
  2. Verify TCP/IP stack is active
    Check network adapter status or run 'ipconfig /all' to confirm TCP/IP protocol is bound to a network adapter
    Affected if TCP/IP networking is enabled and the system can handle TCP connections
  3. Confirm network exposure
    Check if the system has active network interfaces with IP addresses assigned
    Affected if The system is network-connected and can receive TCP packets from remote sources
  4. Review current patch state
    Run 'systeminfo' or check Windows Update history for installed security updates related to May 2005
    Affected if No patches from May 2005 or later addressing TCP/IP stack vulnerabilities have been installed

A system is affected if it runs any of the listed Windows versions (2000, 98se, NT 4.0, XP, or 2003 Server) and has TCP/IP networking enabled, as the vulnerability lies in how the TCP/IP stack processes certain malformed packets with mismatched sequence/acknowledgment numbers.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor patches for the affected operating systems; implement network-level filtering or IDS rules to detect and block anomalous TCP packets with mismatched sequence/acknowledgement numbers.

Fix this in Windows 2000 Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-1184 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2005-1184 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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