CVE-2005-4360

HIGHCVSS v2 · 7.87.8
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS v2 base score.

This CVE was only ever scored under CVSS v2.0. NVD CVSS v2.0 base 7.8 — NVD rates that HIGH (NVD's v2 bands: LOW 0.0–3.9 / MEDIUM 4.0–6.9 / HIGH 7.0–10.0; no CRITICAL band). Vector AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:C/A:N. CVSS v2 is an older, coarser metric than v3.1/v4.0 (no Scope, no User Interaction, no Attack Requirements), so it is not directly comparable to a v3 or v4 score. NVD has never re-scored this record under v3. EPSS predicts 87% exploitation probability in the next 30 days; it does not lift the v2 base. EPSS sets EG Risk's exploitation input. Confidence: LOW.

Triggered by: NVD CVSS v2.0 (legacy fallback)
Sources: NVD CVSS v2.0
Weaponized

Also known asEUVD-2005-4355 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-5jvw-5r9c-59q7 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationNo release containing the referenced fix is confirmed: check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • 13 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running an affected version — derived from Shodan data (© Shodan); a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 87%
  • Public exploit code is available (Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 87%CVSS v2: 7.8Exploit: Exploit-DB (verified)Exposed services: 13

A fix is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but no release containing it is confirmed — find the release that contains it; until it is applied, mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation).

The URL parser in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 5.1 on Windows XP Professional SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via multiple requests to ".dll" followed by arguments such as "~0" through "~9", which causes ntdll.dll to produce a return value that is not correctly handled by IIS, as demonstrated using "/_vti_bin/.dll/*/~0". NOTE: the consequence was originally believed to be only a denial of service (application crash and reboot).

Internet exposure · derived from Shodan data

13 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running a version that maps to CVE-2005-4360, in our KEV-Exposure radar’s Shodan-derived sample.

across 8 countries (United States, China, Germany, Sweden, Korea, Republic of)top: internet_information_services
See the KEV-Exposure radar →Derived from Shodan data. Shodan data is owned by Shodan, which holds its copyright (© Shodan). EchelonGraph claims no ownership of it or copyright in it. Aggregate, host-redacted.

How it counts: every 12 hours, when Shodan query credits allow, the radar runs one Shodan query per tracked product, reads up to 100 ip:port services per query, and keeps a service when its banner version matches a CISA-KEV or high-EPSS CVE; a service is dropped when neither a search nor a Shodan InternetDB port re-check has refreshed it for 21 days. A re-check that finds the port still listed by Shodan InternetDB refreshes the service without re-reading the banner, so a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open. A count is a banner-version inference over a sample, not an exploit test and not an internet-wide census, and the unit is a service, not a machine: a machine answering on two ports counts twice.

CVSS v2.0 (legacy)
7.8HIGHNVD never assigned a CVSS v3 rating to this CVE
EG Score
7.8HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
70
EG Risk 70/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity78% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation87% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
87%
EPSS %ILE
99th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.NVD CVSS v2.0 · CVSS v2.0AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:C/A:N
EG Likelihood
87% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track* at medium mission impactTrack at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is referenced, but no release containing it is confirmed. Check the referenced fix and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains it; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

December 20, 2005

Last Modified

April 16, 2026

References (12)

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 4× in last 7d / 19× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 15 repeat rows among the latest 75 are merged into the row they repeat.

  1. 2026-11-01 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  2. 2026-10-31 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  3. 2026-10-29 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  4. 2026-10-26 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  5. 2026-10-26 00:18 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5jvw-5r9c-59q7 · GitHub severity HIGH
  6. 2026-10-25 20:45 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-25 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  8. 2026-10-21 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-10-19 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  10. 2026-10-18 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  11. 2026-10-18 12:12 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-10-16 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-10-14 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-10-13 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  15. 2026-10-12 22:10 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-12 02:17 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-11 13:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-10-10 19:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  19. 2026-10-07 23:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  20. 2026-10-01 19:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-09-29 02:49 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-09-17 19:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  23. 2026-09-12 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  24. 2026-09-04 04:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  25. 2026-07-26 13:27 UTCEG score recomputeAssessed again: 7.8 HIGH
Show 35 more
  1. 2026-07-25 14:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  2. 2026-07-24 14:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 73% · 99th percentile
  3. 2026-07-23 00:49 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-07-23 00:29 UTCEG score recompute▼ 7.00
  5. 2026-07-22 23:53 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 7.0 HIGH
  6. 2026-07-22 21:33 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-07-15 16:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  8. 2026-07-13 22:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-07-13 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  10. 2026-06-29 14:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  11. 2026-06-25 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  12. 2026-06-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-06-23 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-06-18 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  15. 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  16. 2026-06-15 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 87% · 99th percentile
  17. 2026-06-14 23:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-06-13 22:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  19. 2026-06-12 23:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  20. 2026-06-10 22:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-06-07 15:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  22. 2026-06-06 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  23. 2026-06-05 22:43 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  24. 2026-06-05 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  25. 2026-06-04 13:09 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  26. 2026-06-02 20:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  27. 2026-06-01 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  28. 2026-05-31 11:04 UTCEG score recompute
  29. 2026-05-31 11:03 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-5jvw-5r9c-59q7 · GitHub severity HIGH
  30. 2026-05-31 00:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  31. 2026-05-29 13:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  32. 2026-05-27 13:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  33. 2026-05-22 21:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  34. 2026-05-20 22:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile
  35. 2026-05-18 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 78% · 99th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(2 references)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (2 Exploit-DB entries). No release with the fix is confirmed, so defenders should restrict or isolate affected systems accordingly until one is applied.

  • Exploit-DBEDB-1376✓ verified
    Published Dec 19, 2005

    Microsoft IIS - HTTP Request Denial of Service (1)

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-1377✓ verified
    Published Dec 19, 2005

    Microsoft IIS - HTTP Request Denial of Service (2)

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2005-4360?
CVE-2005-4360 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on December 20, 2005. The URL parser in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 5.1 on Windows XP Professional SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via multiple requests to ".dll" followed by arguments such as "~0" through "~9", which causes ntdll.dll to produce a return value that is not…
When was CVE-2005-4360 made public?
CVE-2005-4360 was made public on December 16, 2005: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, MITRE Corporation, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on December 20, 2005. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of April 16, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2005-4360 actively exploited?
CVE-2005-4360 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. EchelonGraph's EG-KEV model places it in Tier 2 (Weaponized), which is not evidence of exploitation: Exploit-DB marks a public exploit for it as verified. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 87% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
How do I remediate CVE-2005-4360?
A fix for CVE-2005-4360 is referenced (a reference tagged "Patch", often a source commit), but EchelonGraph has no release containing it on record. Check that reference and the vendor's advisory for a release that contains the fix and update to it; until then, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2005-4360

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2005-4360?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.