Common Weakness Enumeration
CWE-129
AllowedImproper Validation of Array Index
Abstraction: Variant · Status: Draft
The product uses untrusted input when calculating or using an array index, but the product does not validate or incorrectly validates the index to ensure the index references a valid position within the array.
745 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-PJHH-88PP-3HG6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-03 18:31 – Updated: 2026-05-21 03:30
VLAI
Details
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: usb: cdc_ncm: add ndpoffset to NDP16 nframes bounds check
cdc_ncm_rx_verify_ndp16() validates that the NDP header and its DPE entries fit within the skb. The first check correctly accounts for ndpoffset:
if ((ndpoffset + sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_ndp16)) > skb_in->len)
but the second check omits it:
if ((sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_ndp16) + ret * (sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_dpe16))) > skb_in->len)
This validates the DPE array size against the total skb length as if the NDP were at offset 0, rather than at ndpoffset. When the NDP is placed near the end of the NTB (large wNdpIndex), the DPE entries can extend past the skb data buffer even though the check passes. cdc_ncm_rx_fixup() then reads out-of-bounds memory when iterating the DPE array.
Add ndpoffset to the nframes bounds check and use struct_size_t() to express the NDP-plus-DPE-array size more clearly.
Severity
7.8 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-23448"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-03T16:16:30Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnet: usb: cdc_ncm: add ndpoffset to NDP16 nframes bounds check\n\ncdc_ncm_rx_verify_ndp16() validates that the NDP header and its DPE\nentries fit within the skb. The first check correctly accounts for\nndpoffset:\n\n if ((ndpoffset + sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_ndp16)) \u003e skb_in-\u003elen)\n\nbut the second check omits it:\n\n if ((sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_ndp16) +\n ret * (sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_dpe16))) \u003e skb_in-\u003elen)\n\nThis validates the DPE array size against the total skb length as if\nthe NDP were at offset 0, rather than at ndpoffset. When the NDP is\nplaced near the end of the NTB (large wNdpIndex), the DPE entries can\nextend past the skb data buffer even though the check passes.\ncdc_ncm_rx_fixup() then reads out-of-bounds memory when iterating\nthe DPE array.\n\nAdd ndpoffset to the nframes bounds check and use struct_size_t() to\nexpress the NDP-plus-DPE-array size more clearly.",
"id": "GHSA-pjhh-88pp-3hg6",
"modified": "2026-05-21T03:30:24Z",
"published": "2026-04-03T18:31:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-23448"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2aa8a4fa8d5b7d0e1ebcec100e1a4d80a1f4b21a"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/403f94ddcb36c552fbef51dea735b131e3dcde8b"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/789204f980730258c983102c027c375238009c80"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dce9dda0e3707e887977db44407989e9ead26611"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f1c7701d3ac91b62d672c13690cf295821f0d5c3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PJRP-XV5Q-3JJ7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-08 15:32 – Updated: 2025-07-08 15:32
VLAI
Details
Memory corruption while operating the mailbox in Automotive.
Severity
5.3 (Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-53009"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-08T13:15:28Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Memory corruption while operating the mailbox in Automotive.",
"id": "GHSA-pjrp-xv5q-3jj7",
"modified": "2025-07-08T15:32:02Z",
"published": "2025-07-08T15:32:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53009"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/july-2025-bulletin.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PJVR-QVH4-FRWQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-30 00:30 – Updated: 2024-11-20 00:32
VLAI
Details
Open Networking Foundation SD-RAN ONOS onos-lib-go 0.10.25 allows an index out-of-range condition in putBitString.
Severity
5.5 (Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-52728"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-30T00:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Open Networking Foundation SD-RAN ONOS onos-lib-go 0.10.25 allows an index out-of-range condition in putBitString.",
"id": "GHSA-pjvr-qvh4-frwq",
"modified": "2024-11-20T00:32:09Z",
"published": "2024-04-30T00:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-52728"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/onosproject/onos-lib-go/issues/245"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PJW7-972H-6JV5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-30 00:30 – Updated: 2024-08-01 15:31
VLAI
Details
Open Networking Foundation SD-RAN Rimedo rimedo-ts 0.1.1 has a slice bounds out-of-range panic in "return uint64(b[2])<<16 | uint64(b[1])<<8 | uint64(b[0])" in reader.go.
Severity
7.5 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-34050"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-30T00:15:07Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Open Networking Foundation SD-RAN Rimedo rimedo-ts 0.1.1 has a slice bounds out-of-range panic in \"return uint64(b[2])\u003c\u003c16 | uint64(b[1])\u003c\u003c8 | uint64(b[0])\" in reader.go.",
"id": "GHSA-pjw7-972h-6jv5",
"modified": "2024-08-01T15:31:43Z",
"published": "2024-04-30T00:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-34050"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/onosproject/rimedo-ts/issues/16"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PMQF-X6X8-P7QW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-20 21:23 – Updated: 2025-11-21 15:31
VLAI
Summary
vLLM vulnerable to DoS with incorrect shape of multimodal embedding inputs
Details
Summary
Users can crash the vLLM engine serving multimodal models by passing multimodal embedding inputs with correct ndim but incorrect shape (e.g. hidden dimension is wrong), regardless of whether the model is intended to support such inputs (as defined in the Supported Models page).
The issue has existed ever since we added support for image embedding inputs, i.e. #6613 (released in v0.5.5)
Details
Using image embeddings as an example:
- For models that support image embedding inputs, the engine crashes when scattering the embeddings to
inputs_embeds(mismatched shape) - For models that don't support image embedding inputs, the engine crashes when validating the inputs inside
get_input_embeddings(validation fails).
This happens because we only validate ndim of the tensor, but not the full shape, in input processor (via MultiModalDataParser).
Impact
- Denial of service by crashing the engine
Mitigation
- Use API key to limit access to trusted users.
- Set
--limit-mm-per-promptto 0 for all non-text modalities to ban multimodal inputs, which includes multimodal embedding inputs. However, the model would then only accept text, defeating the purpose of using a multi-modal model.
Resolution
- https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/27204
Severity
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "vllm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.5.5"
},
{
"fixed": "0.11.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-62372"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-11-20T21:23:29Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-21T02:15:43Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nUsers can crash the vLLM engine serving multimodal models by passing multimodal embedding inputs with correct `ndim` but incorrect `shape` (e.g. hidden dimension is wrong), regardless of whether the model is intended to support such inputs (as defined in the Supported Models page).\n\nThe issue has existed ever since we added support for image embedding inputs, i.e. #6613 (released in v0.5.5)\n\n### Details\n\nUsing image embeddings as an example:\n\n- For models that support image embedding inputs, the engine crashes when scattering the embeddings to `inputs_embeds` (mismatched shape)\n- For models that don\u0027t support image embedding inputs, the engine crashes when validating the inputs inside `get_input_embeddings` (validation fails).\n\nThis happens because we only validate `ndim` of the tensor, but not the full shape, in input processor (via `MultiModalDataParser`).\n\n### Impact\n\n- Denial of service by crashing the engine\n\n### Mitigation\n\n- Use API key to limit access to trusted users.\n- Set `--limit-mm-per-prompt` to 0 for all non-text modalities to ban multimodal inputs, which includes multimodal embedding inputs. However, the model would then only accept text, defeating the purpose of using a multi-modal model.\n\n### Resolution\n\n- https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/27204",
"id": "GHSA-pmqf-x6x8-p7qw",
"modified": "2025-11-21T15:31:38Z",
"published": "2025-11-20T21:23:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/security/advisories/GHSA-pmqf-x6x8-p7qw"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62372"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/27204"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/6613"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/58fab50d82838d5014f4a14d991fdb9352c9c84b"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "vLLM vulnerable to DoS with incorrect shape of multimodal embedding inputs"
}
GHSA-PQ22-W363-WP5P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-28 12:30 – Updated: 2026-06-24 18:32
VLAI
Details
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
wifi: b43: enforce bounds check on firmware key index in b43_rx()
The firmware-controlled key index in b43_rx() can exceed the dev->key[] array size (58 entries). The existing B43_WARN_ON is non-enforcing in production builds, allowing an out-of-bounds read.
Make the B43_WARN_ON check enforcing by dropping the frame when the firmware returns an invalid key index.
Severity
7.8 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-46122"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-28T10:16:27Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nwifi: b43: enforce bounds check on firmware key index in b43_rx()\n\nThe firmware-controlled key index in b43_rx() can exceed the dev-\u003ekey[]\narray size (58 entries). The existing B43_WARN_ON is non-enforcing in\nproduction builds, allowing an out-of-bounds read.\n\nMake the B43_WARN_ON check enforcing by dropping the frame when the\nfirmware returns an invalid key index.",
"id": "GHSA-pq22-w363-wp5p",
"modified": "2026-06-24T18:32:32Z",
"published": "2026-05-28T12:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-46122"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/135cb49c9a42a02cceeac7b49ec03e267f7ed6d6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1e9e55cf66f0fa4799f4d86ef3aaba8e606b5c14"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1f4f78bf8549e6ac4f04fba4176854f3a6e0c332"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/219ba67e69e49681e48c822d6eaafb5def032f34"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3157ad40b084a8f3932da2641749ab45e99b933e"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/765709720e6af9a178abc40244a8d1aa39ac4e71"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c3d7b90dc95020cd9282c4630e402fe224f7644e"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d7029879bafdac2006c67553807d122283dc6cbf"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PQVH-6CG8-V256
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-12-05 03:30 – Updated: 2023-12-05 03:30
VLAI
Details
Memory corruption in Kernel while parsing metadata.
Severity
8.4 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-33053"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-12-05T03:15:11Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Memory corruption in Kernel while parsing metadata.",
"id": "GHSA-pqvh-6cg8-v256",
"modified": "2023-12-05T03:30:22Z",
"published": "2023-12-05T03:30:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-33053"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qualcomm.com/company/product-security/bulletins/december-2023-bulletin"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PRMX-2CPR-RRHX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:06 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:06
VLAI
Details
There is an Improper Validation of Array Index Vulnerability in Huawei Smartphone. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may cause stability risks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-22374"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-06-30T15:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "There is an Improper Validation of Array Index Vulnerability in Huawei Smartphone. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may cause stability risks.",
"id": "GHSA-prmx-2cpr-rrhx",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:06:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:06:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-22374"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://consumer.huawei.com/en/support/bulletin/2021/5"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-PRP5-QV62-FRPC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-26 00:32 – Updated: 2026-06-26 00:32
VLAI
Details
vtk vtk-dicom vtkDICOMItem::NewDataElement heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability
Severity
8.1 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-22879"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-25T22:17:01Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "vtk vtk-dicom vtkDICOMItem::NewDataElement heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability",
"id": "GHSA-prp5-qv62-frpc",
"modified": "2026-06-26T00:32:06Z",
"published": "2026-06-26T00:32:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22879"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2026-2366"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2026-2366"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-PV2R-R7JC-7H77
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:39 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:39
VLAI
Details
Improper input validation in TZ led to array out of bound in TZ function while accessing the peripheral details using the incoming data in Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Wear version MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9650, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 425, SD 430, SD 450, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 835, SDA660.
Severity
7.8 (High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-5914"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-10-26T13:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper input validation in TZ led to array out of bound in TZ function while accessing the peripheral details using the incoming data in Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Wear version MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9650, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 425, SD 430, SD 450, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 835, SDA660.",
"id": "GHSA-pv2r-r7jc-7h77",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:39:21Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:39:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5914"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qualcomm.com/company/product-security/bulletins"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-7
Architecture and Design
Strategy: Input Validation
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Mitigation MIT-15
Architecture and Design
- For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.
Mitigation MIT-3
Requirements
Strategy: Language Selection
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, Ada allows the programmer to constrain the values of a variable and languages such as Java and Ruby will allow the programmer to handle exceptions when an out-of-bounds index is accessed.
Mitigation MIT-11
Operation
Build and Compilation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program's executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.
- Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as "rebasing" (for Windows) and "prelinking" (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].
Mitigation MIT-12
Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].
Mitigation MIT-5
Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When accessing a user-controlled array index, use a stringent range of values that are within the target array. Make sure that you do not allow negative values to be used. That is, verify the minimum as well as the maximum of the range of acceptable values.
Mitigation MIT-35
Implementation
Be especially careful to validate all input when invoking code that crosses language boundaries, such as from an interpreted language to native code. This could create an unexpected interaction between the language boundaries. Ensure that you are not violating any of the expectations of the language with which you are interfacing. For example, even though Java may not be susceptible to buffer overflows, providing a large argument in a call to native code might trigger an overflow.
Mitigation MIT-17
Architecture and Design
Operation
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation MIT-22
Architecture and Design
Operation
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
CAPEC-100: Overflow Buffers
Buffer Overflow attacks target improper or missing bounds checking on buffer operations, typically triggered by input injected by an adversary. As a consequence, an adversary is able to write past the boundaries of allocated buffer regions in memory, causing a program crash or potentially redirection of execution as per the adversaries' choice.