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-2021-44430 Siemens JT Utilities 缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT Utilities 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-44013 Siemens Jt2go 缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT2Go 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-44005 Siemens Jt2go 缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT2Go 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-44006 Siemens Jt2go Jt2go缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT2Go 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-44002 Siemens JT2GO和Siemens Teamcenter Visualization 缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT Open 7.8 High2021-12-14
CVE-2021-44001 Siemens Jt2go和Siemens Teamcenter Visualization 缓冲区错误漏洞 — JT2Go 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-42024 Siemens Simcenter STAR-CCM+ 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Simcenter STAR-CCM+ Viewer 7.8 -2021-12-14
CVE-2021-43814 Heap-based OOB write when parsing dwarf DIE info in Rizin — rizin 7.7 High2021-12-13
CVE-2021-42707 WECON PLC Editor — PLC Editor 7.8 High2021-11-22
CVE-2021-42727 Adobe Bridge Buffer Overflow Arbitrary code execution — Bridge 7.8 High2021-11-22
CVE-2021-42524 Adobe Animate BMP File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Animate 7.8 -2021-11-18
CVE-2021-42272 Adobe Animate GIF File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Animate 7.8 -2021-11-18
CVE-2021-42271 Adobe Animate BMP File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Animate 7.8 -2021-11-18
CVE-2021-42270 Adobe Animate BMP File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Animate 7.8 -2021-11-18
CVE-2021-38684 Buffer Overflow Vulnerability in Multimedia Console — Multimedia Console 8.1 High2021-11-13
CVE-2021-41036 MQTT 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Eclipse Paho MQTT C Client 9.8 -2021-11-02
CVE-2021-34857 Corel Parallels Desktop 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Desktop 8.2 -2021-10-25
CVE-2021-21703 PHP-FPM memory access in root process leading to privilege escalation — PHP 7.8 High2021-10-25
CVE-2021-38479 AUVESY Versiondog — Versiondog 6.5 Medium2021-10-22
CVE-2021-41159 Improper client input validation for FreeRDP gateway connections allows to overwrite memory — FreeRDP 5.8 Medium2021-10-21
CVE-2021-41160 Improper region checks in FreeRDP allow out of bound write to memory — FreeRDP 5.3 Medium2021-10-21
CVE-2021-31374 Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved: RPD crash while processing a specially crafted BGP UPDATE or KEEPALIVE message. — Junos OS 7.5 High2021-10-19
CVE-2021-38426 FATEK Automation WinProladder — WinProladder 7.8 High2021-10-18
CVE-2021-40731 Adobe Acrobat Reader DC JPEG2000 Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Acrobat Reader 7.8 -2021-10-15
CVE-2021-3330 RCE/DOS: Linked-list corruption leading to large out-of-bounds write while sorting for forged fragment list in Zephyr — zephyr 7.1 High2021-10-12
CVE-2021-25492 Samsung Notes 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Samsung Notes 7.3 High2021-10-06
CVE-2021-39843 Adobe Acrobat Reader XObject Out-of-Bound Write Vulnerability — Acrobat Reader 7.8 High2021-09-29
CVE-2021-39829 Adobe FrameMaker PDF File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — FrameMaker 7.8 -2021-09-29
CVE-2021-39831 Adobe FrameMaker PDF File Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — FrameMaker 7.8 High2021-09-29
CVE-2021-39825 Adobe Photoshop Elements Edit 2021 TTF Font Parsing Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability — Photoshop Elements 7.8 High2021-09-27

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.