CWE-96: Improper Neutralization of Directives in Statically Saved Code ('Static Code Injection') Weakness ID: 96 Vulnerability Mapping:
ALLOWEDThis CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities Abstraction: BaseBase - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource. |
Description The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes code syntax before inserting the input into an executable resource, such as a library, configuration file, or template. Common Consequences This table specifies different individual consequences associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to achieve a different impact.Scope | Impact | Likelihood |
---|
Confidentiality
| Technical Impact: Read Files or Directories; Read Application Data The injected code could access restricted data / files. | | Access Control
| Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism In some cases, injectable code controls authentication; this may lead to a remote vulnerability. | | Access Control
| Technical Impact: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity Injected code can access resources that the attacker is directly prevented from accessing. | | Integrity Confidentiality Availability Other
| Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands Code injection attacks can lead to loss of data integrity in nearly all cases as the control-plane data injected is always incidental to data recall or writing. Additionally, code injection can often result in the execution of arbitrary code. | | Non-Repudiation
| Technical Impact: Hide Activities Often the actions performed by injected control code are unlogged. | |
Potential Mitigations
Phase: 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. |
Phase: Implementation Strategy: Output Encoding Perform proper output validation and escaping to neutralize all code syntax from data written to code files. |
Relationships This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore. Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (CWE-1000) Nature | Type | ID | Name |
---|
ChildOf | Base - a weakness
that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource. | 94 | Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') | ParentOf | Variant - a weakness
that is linked to a certain type of product, typically involving a specific language or technology. More specific than a Base weakness. Variant level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 3 to 5 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource. | 97 | Improper Neutralization of Server-Side Includes (SSI) Within a Web Page |
This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore. Relevant to the view "Architectural Concepts" (CWE-1008) Nature | Type | ID | Name |
---|
MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. | 1019 | Validate Inputs |
Modes Of Introduction The different Modes of Introduction provide information about how and when this weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which introduction may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the given phase.Phase | Note |
---|
Implementation | REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic. | Implementation | This issue is frequently found in PHP applications that allow users to set configuration variables that are stored within executable PHP files. Technically, this could also be performed in some compiled code (e.g., by byte-patching an executable), although it is highly unlikely. |
Demonstrative Examples Example 1 This example attempts to write user messages to a message file and allow users to view them. (bad code) Example Language: PHP
$MessageFile = "messages.out"; if ($_GET["action"] == "NewMessage") { $name = $_GET["name"]; $message = $_GET["message"]; $handle = fopen($MessageFile, "a+"); fwrite($handle, "<b>$name</b> says '$message'<hr>\n"); fclose($handle); echo "Message Saved!<p>\n"; } else if ($_GET["action"] == "ViewMessages") { include($MessageFile); }
While the programmer intends for the MessageFile to only include data, an attacker can provide a message such as:
name=h4x0r message=%3C?php%20system(%22/bin/ls%20-l%22);?%3E
which will decode to the following:
<?php system("/bin/ls -l");?>
The programmer thought they were just including the contents of a regular data file, but PHP parsed it and executed the code. Now, this code is executed any time people view messages. Notice that XSS (CWE-79) is also possible in this situation. Observed Examples Reference | Description |
| Perl code directly injected into CGI library file from parameters to another CGI program. |
| Direct PHP code injection into supporting template file. |
| Direct code injection into PHP script that can be accessed by attacker. |
| PHP code from User-Agent HTTP header directly inserted into log file implemented as PHP script. |
| chain: execution after redirect allows non-administrator to perform static code injection. |
Weakness Ordinalities Ordinality | Description |
Primary | (where the weakness exists independent of other weaknesses) |
Affected Resources Memberships This MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a weakness fits within the context of external information sources. Vulnerability Mapping Notes Usage: ALLOWED (this CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities) | Reason: Acceptable-Use | Rationale: This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | Comments: Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. |
Notes Relationship "HTML injection" (see CWE-79: XSS) could be thought of as an example of this, but the code is injected and executed on the client side, not the server side. Server-Side Includes (SSI) are an example of direct static code injection. Taxonomy Mappings Mapped Taxonomy Name | Node ID | Fit | Mapped Node Name |
PLOVER | | | Direct Static Code Injection |
Software Fault Patterns | SFP24 | | Tainted Input to Command |
Content History Submissions |
---|
Submission Date | Submitter | Organization |
---|
2006-07-19 (CWE Draft 3, 2006-07-19) | PLOVER | | | Modifications |
---|
Modification Date | Modifier | Organization |
---|
2008-07-01 | Eric Dalci | Cigital | updated Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction | 2008-09-08 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Applicable_Platforms, Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities | 2009-05-27 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Description, Name | 2010-04-05 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Description, Name | 2010-06-21 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | 2011-06-01 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences | 2012-05-11 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships | 2012-10-30 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | 2013-02-21 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | 2014-06-23 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Enabling_Factors_for_Exploitation, Other_Notes, Relationship_Notes | 2014-07-30 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | 2017-05-03 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Related_Attack_Patterns | 2017-11-08 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Affected_Resources, Applicable_Platforms, Causal_Nature, Demonstrative_Examples, Enabling_Factors_for_Exploitation, Modes_of_Introduction, Relationships | 2020-02-24 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | 2020-06-25 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | 2021-03-15 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Demonstrative_Examples | 2021-10-28 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | 2022-10-13 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | 2023-01-31 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Description | 2023-04-27 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Modes_of_Introduction, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction | 2023-06-29 | CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Mapping_Notes | Previous Entry Names |
---|
Change Date | Previous Entry Name |
---|
2008-04-11 | Direct Static Code Injection | | 2009-05-27 | Insufficient Control of Directives in Statically Saved Code (Static Code Injection) | | 2010-04-05 | Improper Sanitization of Directives in Statically Saved Code ('Static Code Injection') | |
More information is available — Please edit the custom filter or select a different filter.
|