GHSA-FM67-6F3Q-6PQP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-30 18:14 – Updated: 2022-04-30 18:14
VLAI?
Details
Interactions between the CIFS Browser Protocol and NetBIOS as implemented in Microsoft Windows 95, 98, NT, and 2000 allow remote attackers to modify dynamic NetBIOS name cache entries via a spoofed Browse Frame Request in a unicast or UDP broadcast datagram.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2000-1079"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2000-08-29T04:00:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Interactions between the CIFS Browser Protocol and NetBIOS as implemented in Microsoft Windows 95, 98, NT, and 2000 allow remote attackers to modify dynamic NetBIOS name cache entries via a spoofed Browse Frame Request in a unicast or UDP broadcast datagram.",
"id": "GHSA-fm67-6f3q-6pqp",
"modified": "2022-04-30T18:14:52Z",
"published": "2022-04-30T18:14:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2000-1079"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/5168"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://oval.cisecurity.org/repository/search/definition/oval%3Aorg.mitre.oval%3Adef%3A1079"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/ntbugtraq/2000-q3/0116.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.nai.com/research/covert/advisories/045.asp"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1620"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…