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

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1000 CNY

100.0%

CWE-327 (使用已被攻破或存在风险的密码学算法) — Vulnerability Class 256

256 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-327 (使用已被攻破或存在风险的密码学算法). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-327 represents a critical implementation weakness where software relies on deprecated, broken, or inherently risky cryptographic algorithms and protocols. This flaw typically allows attackers to exploit mathematical vulnerabilities or insufficient key lengths to decrypt sensitive data, forge digital signatures, or manipulate transmitted information without detection. By bypassing intended security controls, adversaries can expose confidential records, spoof user identities, or alter system states, leading to severe confidentiality and integrity breaches. To mitigate this risk, developers must rigorously validate cryptographic choices against current industry standards, such as NIST guidelines, ensuring the use of robust, modern algorithms like AES-GCM or SHA-256. Regular security audits and automated static analysis tools further help identify and replace obsolete cryptographic implementations before deployment, thereby maintaining strong data protection against evolving threat landscapes.

MITRE CWE Description
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol. Cryptographic algorithms are the methods by which data is scrambled to prevent observation or influence by unauthorized actors. Insecure cryptography can be exploited to expose sensitive information, modify data in unexpected ways, spoof identities of other users or devices, or other impacts. It is very difficult to produce a secure algorithm, and even high-profile algorithms by accomplished cryptographic experts have been broken. Well-known techniques exist to break or weaken various kinds of cryptography. Accordingly, there are a small number of well-understood and heavily studied algorithms that should be used by most products. Using a non-standard or known-insecure algorithm is dangerous because a determined adversary may be able to break the algorithm and compromise whatever data has been protected. Since the state of cryptography advances so rapidly, it is common for an algorithm to be considered "unsafe" even if it was once thought to be strong. This can happen when new attacks are discovered, or if computing power increases so much that the cryptographic algorithm no longer provides the amount of protection that was originally thought. For a number of reasons, this weakness is even more challenging to manage with hardware deployment of cryptographic algorithms as opposed to software implementation. First, if a flaw is discovered with hardware-implemented cryptography, the flaw cannot be fixed in …
Common Consequences (3)
ConfidentialityRead Application Data
The confidentiality of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm.
IntegrityModify Application Data
The integrity of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm.
Accountability, Non-RepudiationHide Activities
If the cryptographic algorithm is used to ensure the identity of the source of the data (such as digital signatures), then a broken algorithm will compromise this scheme and the source of the data cannot be proven.
Mitigations (5)
Architecture and DesignWhen there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis. For example, US government systems require FIPS 1…
Architecture and DesignEnsure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generat…
Effectiveness: Defense in Depth
Architecture and DesignCarefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
Architecture and DesignUse a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
Implementation, Architecture and DesignWhen using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.
Examples (2)
These code examples use the Data Encryption Standard (DES).
EVP_des_ecb();
Bad · C
Cipher des=Cipher.getInstance("DES..."); des.initEncrypt(key2);
Bad · Java
Suppose a chip manufacturer decides to implement a hashing scheme for verifying integrity property of certain bitstream, and it chooses to implement a SHA1 hardware accelerator for to implement the scheme.
The manufacturer chooses a SHA1 hardware accelerator for to implement the scheme because it already has a working SHA1 Intellectual Property (IP) that the manufacturer had created and used earlier, so this reuse of IP saves design cost.
Bad · Other
The manufacturer could have chosen a cryptographic solution that is recommended by the wide security community (including standard-setting bodies like NIST) and is not expected to be broken (or even better, weakened) within the reasonable life expectancy of the hardware product. In this case, the architects could have used SHA-2 or SHA-3, even if it meant that such choice would cost extra.
Good · Other
CVE IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2025-33084 IBM Concert Software information disclosure — Concert Software 5.9 Medium2025-09-01
CVE-2025-33102 IBM Concert Software information disclosure — Concert Software 5.9 Medium2025-09-01
CVE-2025-9146 Linksys E5600 Firmware checkFw.sh verify_gemtek_header risky encryption — E5600 6.6 Medium2025-08-19
CVE-2024-41986 Siemens多款产品 加密问题漏洞 — SmartClient modules Opcenter QL Home (SC) 6.4 Medium2025-08-12
CVE-2025-54426 Polkadot Frontier contains silent failure in Curve25519 arithmetic precompiles with malformed points — frontier 9.1AICriticalAI2025-07-28
CVE-2025-30477 Dell PowerScale OneFS 加密问题漏洞 — PowerScale OneFS 4.4 Medium2025-07-21
CVE-2025-7214 FNKvision FNK-GU2 MD5 shadow risky encryption — FNK-GU2 1.6 Low2025-07-09
CVE-2024-49784 IBM OpenPages with Watson information disclosure — OpenPages with Watson 5.3 Medium2025-07-08
CVE-2025-49756 Office Developer Platform Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability — Microsoft 365 Apps for Enterprise 3.3 Low2025-07-08
CVE-2025-41223 Siemens多款产品 加密问题漏洞 — RUGGEDCOM i800 4.8 Medium2025-07-08
CVE-2023-52236 Siemens多款产品 加密问题漏洞 — RUGGEDCOM i800 7.0 High2025-07-08
CVE-2025-27458 CVE-2025-27458 — Endress+Hauser MEAC300-FNADE4 6.5 Medium2025-07-03
CVE-2025-6521 TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm — Sight Bulb Pro Firmware ZJ_CG32-2201 7.6 High2025-06-27
CVE-2025-49196 Deprecated TLS version supported — SICK Field Analytics 6.5 Medium2025-06-12
CVE-2025-48946 liboqs affected by theoretical design flaw in HQC — liboqs 3.7 Low2025-05-30
CVE-2025-24007 Siemens SIRIUS 3RK3 Modular Safety System和Siemens SIRIUS Safety Relays 3SK2 加密问题漏洞 — SIRIUS 3RK3 Modular Safety System (MSS) 7.5 High2025-05-13
CVE-2025-2545 Deprecated 3DES cryptographic algorithm used by Request Tracker in emails encrypted with S/MIME — Request Tracker 7.5AIHighAI2025-05-05
CVE-2024-55912 IBM Concert Software information disclosure — Concert Software 5.9 Medium2025-05-02
CVE-2025-3200 Com-Server Exposed via Weak TLS — Com-Server++ 9.1 Critical2025-04-28
CVE-2024-30152 HCL SX is affected by usage of a weak cryptographic algorithm — HCL SX 6.5 Medium2025-04-25
CVE-2024-22314 IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service information disclosure — Storage Defender - Resiliency Service 5.9 Medium2025-04-16
CVE-2022-43851 IBM Aspera Console information disclosure — Aspera Console 5.9 Medium2025-04-14
CVE-2024-31896 IBM SPSS Statistics information disclosure — SPSS Statistics 5.9 Medium2025-03-25
CVE-2025-2539 File Away <= 3.9.9.0.1 - Missing Authorization to Unauthenticated Arbitrary File Read — File Away 7.5 High2025-03-20
CVE-2025-26486 Beta80 Life 1st 安全漏洞 — Life 1st 6.0 Medium2025-03-19
CVE-2024-45643 IBM QRadar EDR information disclosure — QRadar EDR 5.9 Medium2025-03-14
CVE-2025-26708 ZTELink has a configuration defect vulnerability — ZTE Link 4.2 Medium2025-03-07
CVE-2025-27508 Emissary Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm — emissary 7.5 High2025-03-05
CVE-2024-28780 IBM Cognos Controller information disclosure — Cognos Controller 5.9 Medium2025-02-19
CVE-2024-4282 Weak TLS Ciphers on Brocade SANnav OVA SSH port 22 — Brocade SANnav 7.5 -2025-02-14

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-327 (使用已被攻破或存在风险的密码学算法) represent 256 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.