CVE-2008-5180

HIGHNVD 5.37.9
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“▲” beside the score: it is higher than NVD's CVSS score.

Score elevated to 7.9 because EPSS predicted 68% probability of exploitation within the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs) when EchelonGraph scored this CVE. NVD baseline CVSS 5.3 retained for reference. Confidence: see factors.

Triggered by: EPSS exploit prediction (continuous uplift above 30%)
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 3 sources updated this weekWeaponized

Also known asEUVD-2008-5158 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-3j45-2pqx-6qf3 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.9EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationNo fix on record since 2008: if the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, or retire the product (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High exploitation likelihood — EPSS 68%
  • Public exploit code is available (Exploit-DB, marked verified by Exploit-DB, other public proof-of-concept code)
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 68%CVSS: 5.3Exploit: Exploit-DB (verified) · other public PoCExposed services: Not assessed

No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2008 — if the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names; if not, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) or retire the product.

Microsoft Communicator, and Communicator in Microsoft Office 2010 beta, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a large number of SIP INVITE requests, which trigger the creation of many sessions.

CVSS v3
5.3
EG Score
7.9HIGHhigh confidence
EG Risk
66
EG Risk 66/100

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)
Severity53% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.3 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation68% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability100% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: yes (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2008. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, or retire the product.
EPSS PROB
68%
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 (7.9): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.9 is EPSS's lift toward 9.0 from its impact severity (EG Severity, CVSS 5.3 MEDIUM): a likelihood of exploitation, not impact.

EG Severity
5.3 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
68% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-31). 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 or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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.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 or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2008. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, or retire the product.

Exploitation public PoC (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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; 60 days 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.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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

November 20, 2008

Last Modified

April 23, 2026

Advisory Details (7)

Auto-updated May 30, 2026
No fix on record since 2008.
Web page

Microsoft Office 2010 Beta - Communicator SIP Denial of Service - Windows dos Exploit

http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/12079
Web page

About Secunia Research | Flexera

http://secunia.com/advisories/32940
Web page

Microsoft Office - Communicator 'SIP' Remote Denial of Service - Windows dos Exploit

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/7262

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 6× in last 7d / 26× 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.

Showing the most recent 83 of 101 refreshes on record for this CVE.

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. 17 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 18 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-01 05:18 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-11-01 05:18 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3j45-2pqx-6qf3 · GitHub CVSS 5.3
  3. 2026-10-31 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  5. 2026-10-29 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  6. 2026-10-27 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  7. 2026-10-25 20:27 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-25 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 10:32 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-10-25 10:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-3j45-2pqx-6qf3 · GitHub CVSS 5.3
  11. 2026-10-24 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  12. 2026-10-23 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-10-21 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-10-20 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  15. 2026-10-19 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  16. 2026-10-18 11:48 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-17 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-10-16 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  19. 2026-10-14 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  20. 2026-10-13 16:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-10-12 21:50 UTCEG score recompute
  22. 2026-10-12 01:57 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-10 19:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  24. 2026-10-09 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  25. 2026-10-07 23:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
Show 58 more
  1. 2026-10-03 14:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  2. 2026-10-01 19:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  3. 2026-09-29 07:53 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-09-26 15:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  5. 2026-09-18 19:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  6. 2026-09-17 19:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  7. 2026-09-15 03:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  8. 2026-09-13 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  9. 2026-09-12 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  10. 2026-09-10 09:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  11. 2026-09-06 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  12. 2026-09-05 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  13. 2026-09-04 04:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  14. 2026-08-30 01:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  15. 2026-08-28 21:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  16. 2026-08-15 01:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  17. 2026-08-07 16:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  18. 2026-08-06 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  19. 2026-07-30 01:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  20. 2026-07-25 14:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  21. 2026-07-24 14:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  22. 2026-07-23 00:57 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-07-23 00:35 UTCEG score recompute
  24. 2026-07-23 00:02 UTCEG score recompute▲ 2.60
  25. 2026-07-22 21:41 UTCEG score recompute
  26. 2026-07-20 17:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  27. 2026-07-16 16:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  28. 2026-07-15 16:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  29. 2026-07-13 22:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  30. 2026-07-13 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  31. 2026-07-11 08:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  32. 2026-07-09 19:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  33. 2026-07-06 16:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  34. 2026-07-01 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  35. 2026-06-28 04:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  36. 2026-06-27 03:04 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  37. 2026-06-25 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  38. 2026-06-24 14:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  39. 2026-06-23 21:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  40. 2026-06-21 01:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  41. 2026-06-19 19:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  42. 2026-06-17 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  43. 2026-06-16 17:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  44. 2026-06-15 17:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 68% · 99th percentile
  45. 2026-06-14 23:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  46. 2026-06-13 22:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  47. 2026-06-12 23:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  48. 2026-06-11 13:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  49. 2026-06-10 22:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  50. 2026-06-10 13:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  51. 2026-06-07 15:22 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  52. 2026-06-06 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  53. 2026-06-05 22:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  54. 2026-06-05 06:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  55. 2026-06-02 20:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  56. 2026-06-01 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  57. 2026-05-31 22:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile
  58. 2026-05-31 00:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 77% · 98th percentile

Publicly available exploits

(2 references)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (2 Exploit-DB entries). No fix has been recorded since the CVE record was published in 2008. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system or retire the product.

  • Exploit-DBEDB-7262✓ verified
    Published Nov 28, 2008

    Microsoft Office - Communicator 'SIP' Remote Denial of Service

    Open source ↗
  • Exploit-DBEDB-12079
    Published Apr 6, 2010

    Microsoft Office 2010 Beta - Communicator SIP Denial of Service

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2008-5180?
CVE-2008-5180 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on November 20, 2008. Microsoft Communicator, and Communicator in Microsoft Office 2010 beta, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a large number of SIP INVITE requests, which trigger the creation of many sessions.
When was CVE-2008-5180 made public?
CVE-2008-5180 was made public on November 11, 2008: 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 November 20, 2008. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of April 23, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2008-5180 actively exploited?
CVE-2008-5180 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, and CISA's SSVC data says a public PoC exists and its EPSS is 50% or more. EchelonGraph does not test whether exploit code works. FIRST EPSS estimates a 68% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (99th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2008-5180?
CVE-2008-5180 has a CVSS v3 base score of 5.3 (NVD). EchelonGraph synthesises NVD + FIRST EPSS + GHSA into a combined EG score of 7.9 (HIGH).
How do I remediate CVE-2008-5180?
No fix for CVE-2008-5180 has been recorded since its CVE record was published in 2008. If the vendor still supports the product, apply the fixed version it names; if it no longer does, isolate the affected system (restrict network access to it, for example with a firewall, or keep it off the internet) or retire the product.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2008-5180

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2008-5180?

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