CVE-2005-3644 in Windows
Summary
by MITRE
PNP_GetDeviceList (upnp_getdevicelist) in UPnP for Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4 and earlier, and possibly Windows XP SP1 and earlier, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a DCE RPC request that specifies a large output buffer size, a variant of CVE-2006-6296, and a different vulnerability than CVE-2005-2120.
Once again VulDB remains the best source for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 06/29/2025
The vulnerability described in CVE-2005-3644 represents a significant denial of service weakness within the Universal Plug and Play implementation of Microsoft Windows operating systems. This flaw specifically affects Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 and earlier versions, as well as Windows XP Service Pack 1 and earlier releases. The vulnerability manifests through the PNP_GetDeviceList function, which is part of the UPnP stack responsible for discovering and managing network devices. The issue arises when the upnp_getdevicelist function processes DCE RPC requests that contain excessively large output buffer size specifications, creating a condition where system resources become consumed at an unsustainable rate.
The technical exploitation of this vulnerability occurs through the manipulation of DCE RPC communication protocols within the UPnP framework. When a malicious remote attacker sends a crafted RPC request with an oversized buffer parameter, the system's memory allocation mechanisms become overwhelmed as they attempt to fulfill the request with the specified large buffer size. This creates a memory consumption attack pattern that can rapidly deplete available system resources, ultimately leading to system instability and denial of service conditions. The vulnerability operates at the protocol level within the Windows networking stack, specifically targeting the device enumeration capabilities of the UPnP implementation.
From an operational perspective, this vulnerability presents a substantial risk to networked environments where Windows systems are exposed to untrusted network traffic. The attack requires only a remote connection to the affected system and does not require authentication, making it particularly dangerous in environments with open network access. The impact extends beyond simple service disruption as the memory exhaustion can potentially cause system crashes, application failures, and overall network instability. Organizations running affected Windows versions may experience cascading failures as the memory consumption affects multiple system components and services that depend on available memory resources.
The vulnerability aligns with CWE-400, which categorizes it as a weakness related to uncontrolled resource consumption, specifically memory exhaustion. This classification emphasizes the fundamental flaw in resource management where the system fails to properly validate or limit the size of buffer requests. From an ATT&CK framework perspective, this vulnerability maps to the T1499.004 technique for network denial of service, and potentially to T1071.004 for application layer protocol usage. The attack vector demonstrates how seemingly legitimate network protocols can be weaponized to consume system resources, creating a classic resource exhaustion attack pattern that has been documented across multiple network security domains.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability primarily involve applying the appropriate Microsoft security patches that address the UPnP implementation flaws in affected Windows versions. System administrators should prioritize updating Windows 2000 and XP systems to versions that contain the necessary fixes for this vulnerability. Network segmentation and firewall rules can help limit exposure by blocking unnecessary UPnP traffic, particularly DCE RPC communications. Additionally, implementing memory monitoring and resource allocation limits can help detect and prevent the memory consumption patterns that lead to system instability. The vulnerability serves as a reminder of the importance of keeping network protocols and system implementations up to date, as the UPnP stack's exposure to remote attack vectors can create persistent security risks when not properly maintained.