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

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1000 CNY

100.0%
Buy Us a Coffee

CWE-787 (跨界内存写) — Vulnerability Class 2200

2200 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-2026-20432 MediaTek Chipsets 缓冲区错误漏洞 — MediaTek chipset 8.0AIHighAI2026-04-07
CVE-2019-25681 Xlight FTP Server 3.9.1 SEH Overwrite Buffer Overflow — Xlight 8.4 High2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25679 RealTerm Serial Terminal 2.0.0.70 Buffer Overflow SEH — RealTerm: Serial Terminal 7.8 High2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25670 River Past Video Cleaner 7.6.3 Buffer Overflow via SEH — River Past Video Cleaner 8.4 High2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25667 TaskInfo 8.2.0.280 Denial of Service Buffer Overflow — TaskInfo 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25666 SpotAuditor 3.6.7 Denial of Service Buffer Overflow — SpotAuditor 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25665 River Past Ringtone Converter 2.7.6.1601 Buffer Overflow DoS — River Past Ringtone Converter 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25661 Remote Process Explorer 1.0.0.16 Local Buffer Overflow DoS — Remote Process Explorer 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25660 LanHelper 1.74 Denial of Service via Buffer Overflow — LanHelper 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25659 ASPRunner Professional 6.0.766 Local Buffer Overflow DoS — ASPRunner Professional 6.2 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25658 a-Mac Address Change 5.4 Local Buffer Overflow DoS — Mac Address Change 5.5 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2019-25656 R i386 3.5.0 Local Buffer Overflow SEH — R i386 8.4 High2026-04-05
CVE-2018-25256 IP TOOLS 2.50 Local Buffer Overflow Denial of Service — IP TOOLS 5.5 Medium2026-04-05
CVE-2018-25255 10-Strike LANState 8.8 Local Buffer Overflow SEH — Strike LANState 8.4 High2026-04-04
CVE-2018-25254 NICO-FTP 3.0.1.19 Buffer Overflow SEH — NICO-FTP 9.8 Critical2026-04-04
CVE-2018-25253 Termite 3.4 Denial of Service via Settings Buffer Overflow — Termite 6.2 Medium2026-04-04
CVE-2018-25252 FTP Voyager 16.2.0 Denial of Service via Malformed Site Profile — FTP Voyager 6.2 Medium2026-04-04
CVE-2018-25251 Snes9K 0.0.9z Buffer Overflow SEH via Netplay Socket — Snes9K 0.0.9z 8.4 High2026-04-04
CVE-2016-20050 NetSchedScan 1.0 Buffer Overflow Denial of Service — NetSchedScan 6.2 Medium2026-04-04
CVE-2026-35559 Out-of-bounds write in query processing components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver — Amazon Athena ODBC driver 6.5 Medium2026-04-03
CVE-2026-5318 LibRaw JPEG DHT losslessjpeg.cpp initval out-of-bounds write — LibRaw 4.3 Medium2026-04-02
CVE-2026-5317 Nothings stb stb_vorbis.c start_decoder out-of-bounds write — stb 6.3 Medium2026-04-02
CVE-2026-20097 Cisco Integrated Management Controller Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Cisco Unified Computing System (Standalone) 6.5 Medium2026-04-01
CVE-2026-5190 AWS C Event Stream Streaming Decoder Stack Buffer Overflow — aws-c-event-stream 7.5 High2026-03-31
CVE-2019-25654 Core FTP/SFTP Server 1.2 Denial of Service via Buffer Overflow — Core FTP/SFTP Server 7.5 High2026-03-30
CVE-2018-25235 NetworkActiv Web Server 4.0 Username Field Buffer Overflow DoS — NetworkActiv Web Server 6.2 Medium2026-03-30
CVE-2018-25230 Free IP Switcher 3.1 Denial of Service via Computer Name — Free IP Switcher 5.5 Medium2026-03-30
CVE-2018-25228 NetSetMan 4.7.1 Workgroup Buffer Overflow Denial of Service — NetSetMan 6.2 Medium2026-03-30
CVE-2018-25226 FTPShell Server 6.83 Denial of Service via Account Name — FTPShell Server 6.2 Medium2026-03-30
CVE-2017-20228 Flat Assembler 1.71.21 Stack-Based Buffer Overflow ROP — Flat Assembler 8.4 High2026-03-28

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-787 (跨界内存写) represent 2200 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.