Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1310 CNY

100%

CWE-20 (输入验证不恰当) — Vulnerability Class 3418

3418 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-20 (输入验证不恰当). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-20 represents a critical software weakness where applications fail to properly verify the integrity, format, or type of incoming data before processing it. This oversight allows attackers to inject malicious payloads, such as SQL injection strings or cross-site scripting code, which can bypass security controls and compromise system integrity. Exploitation typically occurs when untrusted data from external sources, like user forms or network packets, is treated as executable code or trusted input. To mitigate this risk, developers must implement rigorous input validation strategies, including strict type checking, length constraints, and allow-listing acceptable characters. Additionally, employing parameterized queries and output encoding ensures that even if validation fails, the injected data remains inert, thereby preserving application security and preventing unauthorized execution or data exposure.

MITRE CWE Description
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly. Input validation is a frequently-used technique for checking potentially dangerous inputs in order to ensure that the inputs are safe for processing within the code, or when communicating with other components. Input can consist of: raw data - strings, numbers, parameters, file contents, etc. metadata - information about the raw data, such as headers or size Data can be simple or structured. Structured data can be composed of many nested layers, composed of combinations of metadata and raw data, with other simple or structured data. Many properties of raw data or metadata may need to be validated upon entry into the code, such as: specified quantities such as size, length, frequency, price, rate, number of operations, time, etc. implied or derived quantities, such as the actual size of a file instead of a specified size indexes, offsets, or positions into more complex data structures symbolic keys or other elements into hash tables, associative arrays, etc. well-formedness, i.e. syntactic correctness - compliance with expected syntax lexical token correctness - compliance with rules for what is treated as a token specified or derived type - the actual type of the input (or what the input appears to be) consistency - between individual data el…
Common Consequences (3)
AvailabilityDoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU), DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
An attacker could provide unexpected values and cause a program crash or arbitrary control of resource allocation, leading to excessive consumption of resources such as memory and CPU.
ConfidentialityRead Memory, Read Files or Directories
An attacker could read confidential data if they are able to control resource references.
Integrity, Confidentiality, AvailabilityModify Memory, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
An attacker could use malicious input to modify data or possibly alter control flow in unexpected ways, including arbitrary command execution.
Mitigations (5)
Architecture and DesignConsider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subjec…
Architecture and DesignUse 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).
Architecture and Design, ImplementationUnderstand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may b…
ImplementationAssume 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…
Effectiveness: High
Architecture and DesignFor 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 clien…
Examples (2)
This example demonstrates a shopping interaction in which the user is free to specify the quantity of items to be purchased and a total is calculated.
... public static final double price = 20.00; int quantity = currentUser.getAttribute("quantity"); double total = price * quantity; chargeUser(total); ...
Bad · Java
This example asks the user for a height and width of an m X n game board with a maximum dimension of 100 squares.
... #define MAX_DIM 100 ... /* board dimensions */ int m,n, error; board_square_t *board; printf("Please specify the board height: \n"); error = scanf("%d", &m); if ( EOF == error ){ die("No integer passed: Die evil hacker!\n"); } printf("Please specify the board width: \n"); error = scanf("%d", &n); if ( EOF == error ){ die("No integer passed: Die evil hacker!\n"); } if ( m > MAX_DIM || n > MAX_DIM ) { die("Value too large: Die evil hacker!\n"); } board = (board_square_t*) malloc( m * n * sizeof(board_square_t)); ...
Bad · C
CVE IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2022-43849 IBM AIX denial of service — AIX 6.2 Medium2022-12-23
CVE-2022-43848 IBM AIX denial of service — AIX 6.2 Medium2022-12-23
CVE-2022-40233 IBM AIX denial of service — AIX 6.2 Medium2022-12-23
CVE-2022-43875 IBM Financial Transaction Manager for SWIFT Services for Multiplatforms denial of service — Financial Transaction Manager for SWIFT Services for Multiplatforms 6.2 Medium2022-12-20
CVE-2022-3752 Rockwell Automation GuardLogix and ControlLogix controllers Vulnerable to Denial-Of-Service Attack — CompactLogix 5480 8.6 High2022-12-19
CVE-2022-46768 File name information disclosure vulnerability in Zabbix Web Service Report Generation — Web Service Report Generation 5.9 Medium2022-12-19
CVE-2022-4427 SQL Injection via OTRS Search API — OTRS 6.5 Medium2022-12-19
CVE-2022-3157 Rockwell Automation GuardLogix and ControlLogix controllers Vulnerable to Denial-Of-Service Attack — CompactLogix 5370 8.6 High2022-12-16
CVE-2021-28655 Apache Zeppelin: Arbitrary file deletion vulnerability — Apache Zeppelin 8.2 -2022-12-16
CVE-2022-4504 Improper Input Validation in openemr/openemr — openemr/openemr 7.5 -2022-12-15
CVE-2022-46363 Apache CXF directory listing / code exfiltration — Apache CXF 9.1 -2022-12-13
CVE-2021-40365 Siemens SIMATIC Drive Controller 输入验证错误漏洞 — SIMATIC Drive Controller CPU 1504D TF 7.5 High2022-12-13
CVE-2022-43515 X-Forwarded-For header is active by default causes access to Zabbix sites in maintenance mode — Frontend 5.3 Medium2022-12-12
CVE-2022-33876 Fortinet FortiADC 输入验证错误漏洞 — FortiADC 5.1 Medium2022-12-06
CVE-2022-38123 Insufficient validation of plugin files — GateManager 8.7 High2022-12-06
CVE-2021-37533 Apache Commons Net's FTP client trusts the host from PASV response by default — Apache Commons Net 6.5 -2022-12-03
CVE-2022-1471 Remote Code execution in SnakeYAML — SnakeYAML 8.3 High2022-12-01
CVE-2022-40265 Denial of Service (DoS) Vulnerability in MELSEC iQ-R Series Ethernet Interface Module — MELSEC iQ-R Series RJ71EN71 8.6 High2022-11-30
CVE-2022-4033 Quiz and Survey Master <= 8.0.4 - Improper Input Validation — Quiz and Survey Master (QSM) – Easy Quiz and Survey Maker 5.3 Medium2022-11-29
CVE-2022-4032 Quiz and Survey Master <= 8.0.4 - Unauthenticated iFrame Injection via Paragraph and Short Answer — Quiz and Survey Master (QSM) – Easy Quiz and Survey Maker 7.2 High2022-11-29
CVE-2022-41921 Discourse chat messages should have a maximum character limit — discourse 3.5 Low2022-11-28
CVE-2022-39338 Stored cross site scripting (XSS) vulnerability via Authorization Endpoint in user_oidc — security-advisories 3.5 Low2022-11-25
CVE-2022-40266 Denial-of-Service (DoS) Vulnerability in FTP Server Function on GOT2000 Series — GOT2000 Series GT27 model 5.3 Medium2022-11-24
CVE-2022-41942 Sourcegraph vulnerable to Comand Injection via gitserver — sourcegraph 7.9 High2022-11-22
CVE-2022-3388 Input Validation Vulnerability in Hitachi Energy’s MicroSCADA Pro/X SYS600 Products — MicroSCADA Pro SYS600 8.8 High2022-11-21
CVE-2022-45470 Apache Hama allows XSS and information disclosure — Apache Hama 6.5 -2022-11-21
CVE-2022-24037 Unauthorized modification in Karmasis Informatics Infraskope SIEM+ — Infraskope SIEM+ 8.2 High2022-11-18
CVE-2022-31607 NVIDIA graphics driver 输入验证错误漏洞 — NVIDIA Cloud Gaming (guest driver), NVIDIA Cloud Gaming (Virtual GPU Manager) 7.8 High2022-11-18
CVE-2022-31616 NVIDIA GPU Display Driver 缓冲区错误漏洞 — NVIDIA Cloud Gaming (guest driver) 6.1 Medium2022-11-18
CVE-2022-41888 Unckecked rank size in `tf.image.generate_bounding_box_proposals` in Tensorflow — tensorflow 4.8 Medium2022-11-18

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-20 (输入验证不恰当) represent 3418 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.