CVE-2011-1970
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 DNS server in Microsoft Windows Server 2003 SP2 and Windows Server 2008 SP2, R2, and R2 SP1 does not properly initialize memory, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (service outage) via a query for a nonexistent domain, aka "DNS Uninitialized Memory Corruption Vulnerability."
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 confidenceThe DNS server in Windows Server 2003 SP2 and Windows Server 2008 SP2/R2/R2 SP1 fails to properly initialize memory before use. When a remote attacker sends a query for a nonexistent domain, the uninitialized memory is accessed, causing the DNS service to crash and resulting in a denial of service condition.
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 versionsall versions= 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
- 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify DNS Server role is installedRun 'Get-WindowsFeature -Name DNS' in PowerShell (Server 2008+) or check if the DNS service exists via 'Get-Service -Name DNS'Affected if The DNS Server role or DNS service is present on the system
-
Confirm Windows version is affectedRun 'systeminfo' or 'winver' and check if the OS is Windows Server 2003 (any SP), Windows Server 2008 (any SP), or Windows Server 2008 R2 (any SP)Affected if The installed OS is Windows Server 2003, Server 2008, or Server 2008 R2 (unpatched)
-
Check if MS11-058 security update is installedRun 'wmic qfe list | findstr "MS11-058"' or view installed updates via Control Panel > Programs > View installed updatesAffected if The MS11-058 update is NOT installed; the system remains vulnerable
A system is affected if it runs the DNS Server role on Windows Server 2003/2008/2008 R2 and lacks the MS11-058 security update.
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 the relevant Microsoft security update (MS11-058) to affected Windows Server systems. For systems that can no longer receive updates, consider migrating DNS services to supported operating systems or implementing network-level filtering to block malicious DNS queries.
- Consultation3.0 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 $2,880.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-1970 — 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-2011-1970 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