Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM Lotus Domino 6.5.2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) BaseTarget or (2) Src parameters.

Buffer overflow in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.5 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (router crash or hang) via unspecified vectors involving "CD to MIME Conversion".

Unspecified vulnerability in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.5, when running on AIX, allows attackers to cause a denial of service (deep recursion leading to stack overflow and crash) via long formulas.

Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.5 have unknown impact and attack vectors, due to "potential security issues" as identified by SPR numbers (1) GPKS6C9J67 in Agents, (2) JGAN6B6TZ3 and (3) KSPR699NBP in the Router, (4) GPKS5YQGPT in Security, or (5) HSAO6BNL6Y in the Web Server. NOTE: vector 3 is related to an issue in NROUTER in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.4 FP1, 6.5.5, and 7.0, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via a crafted vCal meeting request sent via SMTP (aka SPR# KSPR699NBP).

Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.5 allow attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via multiple vectors, involving (1) a malformed message sent to an "Out Of Office" agent (SPR LPEE6DMQWJ), (2) the compact command (RTIN5U2SAJ), (3) malformed bitmap images (MYAA6FH5HW), (4) the "Delete Attachment" action (YPHG6844LD), (5) parsing certificates from a remote Certificate Table (AELE6DZFJW), and (6) creating a SSL key ring with the Domino Administration client (NSUA4FQPTN).

Multiple memory leaks in IBM Lotus Notes and Domino Server before 6.5.5 allow attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and crash) via unknown vectors related to (1) unspecified vectors during the SSL handshake (SPR# MKIN67MQVW), (2) the stash file during the SSL handshake (SPR# MKIN693QUT), and possibly other vectors. NOTE: due to insufficient information in the original vendor advisory, it is not clear whether there is an attacker role in other memory leaks that are specified in the advisory.