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

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1336 CNY

100%

CWE-787 (跨界内存写) — Vulnerability Class 2487

2487 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-787 (跨界内存写). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-787 represents a critical memory management weakness where software incorrectly writes data beyond the allocated boundaries of a buffer. This flaw typically arises from insufficient bounds checking, allowing attackers to overwrite adjacent memory locations with malicious payloads. Exploitation often leads to arbitrary code execution, denial of service, or privilege escalation by corrupting critical system structures or control flow data. Developers mitigate this risk by implementing rigorous input validation and utilizing safe programming practices that enforce strict boundary checks before any memory operation. Employing modern languages with automatic memory management, such as Rust or Java, further reduces exposure by preventing direct pointer arithmetic. Additionally, static analysis tools and fuzzing techniques help identify potential out-of-bounds conditions during the development lifecycle, ensuring that buffer operations remain within their intended limits and preserving application integrity against memory corruption attacks.

MITRE CWE Description
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Common Consequences (3)
IntegrityModify Memory, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Write operations could cause memory corruption. In some cases, an adversary can modify control data such as return addresses in order to execute unexpected code.
AvailabilityDoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
Attempting to access out-of-range, invalid, or unauthorized memory could cause the product to crash.
OtherUnexpected State
Subsequent write operations can produce undefined or unexpected results.
Mitigations (5)
RequirementsUse a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a lan…
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. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
Operation, Build and CompilationUse automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses…
Effectiveness: Defense in Depth
ImplementationConsider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application's memory: Double check that the buffer is as large as specified. When using functions that accept a number of bytes to copy, such as strncpy(), be aware that if the destination buffer size is equal to the source buffer size, it may not NULL-terminate the string. Check buffer boundaries if accessing the buffer in a…
Operation, Build and CompilationRun 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…
Effectiveness: Defense in Depth
Examples (2)
The following code attempts to save four different identification numbers into an array.
int id_sequence[3]; /* Populate the id array. */ id_sequence[0] = 123; id_sequence[1] = 234; id_sequence[2] = 345; id_sequence[3] = 456;
Bad · C
In the following code, it is possible to request that memcpy move a much larger segment of memory than assumed:
int returnChunkSize(void *) { /* if chunk info is valid, return the size of usable memory, * else, return -1 to indicate an error */ ... } int main() { ... memcpy(destBuf, srcBuf, (returnChunkSize(destBuf)-1)); ... }
Bad · C
CVE IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2026-20466 MediaTek Chipsets 缓冲区错误漏洞 — MediaTek chipset--2026-08-03
CVE-2026-20464 MediaTek Chipsets 缓冲区错误漏洞 — MediaTek chipset--2026-08-03
CVE-2026-68579 FreeRDP before 3.30.0 Heap Overflow via CliprdrStream_Read — FreeRDP 9.6 Critical2026-08-02
CVE-2026-34641 Premiere Pro | Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) — Premiere 7.8 High2026-07-31
CVE-2026-47876 VMXNET3 out-of-bounds write vulnerability — Cloud Foundation 9.3 Critical2026-07-30
CVE-2026-17544 Out-of-bounds write in bccomp() via crafted operand and scale — PHP 8.1 High2026-07-30
CVE-2026-17727 Google Chrome 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Chrome--2026-07-30
CVE-2026-17721 Google Chrome 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Chrome--2026-07-30
CVE-2026-17691 Google Chrome 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Chrome--2026-07-30
CVE-2026-17675 Google Chrome 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Chrome--2026-07-30
CVE-2026-62363 ImageMagick: Heap Buffer Over-Write in fx operation — ImageMagick 5.0 Medium2026-07-30
CVE-2026-12927 Schneider Electric IGSS Definition 缓冲区错误漏洞 — IGSS Definition (Def.exe) 8.4 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-18220 Binutils: binutils: out-of-bounds write in bfd dlx elf backend relocation processing — Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 7.8 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-58188 Apache Traffic Server: Memory-safety and limit-bypass errors across experimental plugins — Apache Traffic Server 8.2 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-58187 Apache Traffic Server: Multiplexer plugin chunk decoder enables a denial of service — Apache Traffic Server 3.7 Low2026-07-29
CVE-2026-58184 Apache Traffic Server: header_rewrite plugin cookie handling can corrupt memory — Apache Traffic Server 8.2 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-58177 Apache Traffic Server: Memory-safety and path-traversal errors in the Cripts framework — Apache Traffic Server 8.1 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-58154 Apache Traffic Server: Memory-safety errors in MIME and header parsing — Apache Traffic Server 8.9 High2026-07-29
CVE-2026-35226 Out-of-bounds Write in CODESYS PROFINET Controller — CODESYS PROFINET 6.5 Medium2026-07-29
CVE-2026-15057 IBM WebSphere Application Server Liberty is affected by a denial of service vulnerability — WebSphere Application Server - Liberty 7.5 High2026-07-28
CVE-2026-48394 Bridge | Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) — Adobe Bridge 7.8 High2026-07-28
CVE-2026-48392 Bridge | Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) — Adobe Bridge 7.8 High2026-07-28
CVE-2026-48393 Bridge | Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) — Adobe Bridge 7.8 High2026-07-28
CVE-2026-10682 Out-of-bounds write in Zephyr `log_filter_set` syscall verifier reachable from userspace — zephyr 6.6 Medium2026-07-27
CVE-2026-66041 FFmpeg 7.0 - 8.1.2 Heap Out-of-Bounds Write via vf_quirc Filter — FFmpeg 8.8 High2026-07-24
CVE-2026-45813 Apache NimBLE: Incorrect data validation in BASS add/modify source operation — Apache NimBLE--2026-07-24
CVE-2026-16807 Google Chrome 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Chrome--2026-07-23
CVE-2026-65706 FFmpeg 3.0 - 8.1.2 vf_swaprect Out-of-Bounds Write via NV12 Frame Processing — FFmpeg 7.8 High2026-07-23
CVE-2026-65705 FFmpeg 3.4 - 8.1.2 vf_floodfill Out-of-Bounds Write via filter_frame() — FFmpeg 7.8 High2026-07-23
CVE-2026-65704 FFmpeg 8.1.2 Out-of-Bounds Write via TY Demuxer and Shorten Decoder — FFmpeg 7.8 High2026-07-23

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-787 (跨界内存写) represent 2487 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.