CVE-2011-0654
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 · uneditedInteger underflow in the BowserWriteErrorLogEntry function in the Common Internet File System (CIFS) browser service in Mrxsmb.sys or bowser.sys in Active Directory in Microsoft Windows XP SP2 and SP3, Windows Server 2003 SP2, Windows Vista SP1 and SP2, Windows Server 2008 Gold, SP2, R2, and R2 SP1, and Windows 7 Gold and SP1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (system crash) via a malformed BROWSER ELECTION message, leading to a heap-based buffer overflow, aka "Browser Pool Corruption Vulnerability." NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
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 confidenceInteger underflow in the BowserWriteErrorLogEntry function in the CIFS browser service (Mrxsmb.sys or bowser.sys) allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via malformed BROWSER ELECTION messages, causing a heap-based buffer overflow (Browser Pool Corruption). This is a pre-authentication remote code execution vulnerability in the SMB browser service.
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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
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.
-
Verify the Windows versionRun 'winver' or check system properties (sysdm.cpl) to confirm the exact Windows version and build numberAffected if The system is running Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2003 Server (any version)
-
Identify if the Browser service is runningOpen Services (services.msc) and locate the 'Computer Browser' service, or run 'sc query browservice' from command promptAffected if The Computer Browser service is running (this service hosts the vulnerable bowser.sys driver)
-
Check for open SMB browser portsRun 'netstat -an | findstr "138\|445"' to see if UDP ports 138 and 445 are listening, or use PortQry.exe with -e parameterAffected if UDP port 138 (Browser service) or port 445 (SMB) is open and listening on the system
-
Verify the bowser.sys driver is loadedRun 'driverquery /v | findstr bowser' or check Device Manager for hidden devices, or look for bowser.sys in %SystemRoot%\System32\drivers\Affected if The bowser.sys driver is loaded and active on the system
A user is affected if the system is Windows Server 2003 (any version) with the Computer Browser service running and UDP ports 138 or 445 exposed.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply Microsoft security updates for CVE-2011-0654 to all affected Windows systems; until patched, consider disabling the CIFS Browser service or blocking UDP ports 138/445 at network boundaries to reduce attack surface.
Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows Server 2016, Windows Server 2019, or Windows Server 2022
- 1. Note that Windows Server 2003 reached End of Support on July 14, 2015 and no longer receives security updates from Microsoft.
- 2. Plan and schedule migration from Windows Server 2003 to a supported operating system such as Windows Server 2012 R2, 2016, 2019, or 2022.
- 3. Before migration, apply the historical Microsoft security update MS11-020 (Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer) if still available through Microsoft Security Response Center for interim protection.
- 4. Migrate applications and services to the new Windows Server version.
- 5. Verify all functionality works correctly on the new system.
- 6. Decommission the Windows Server 2003 systems after successful migration.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2011-0654 — 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-2011-0654 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