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-2018-7509 Delta Electronics WPLSoft 安全漏洞 — Delta Electronics WPLSoft 8.8 -2018-05-04
CVE-2018-8837 Advantech WebAccess HMI Designer 安全漏洞 — Advantech WebAccess HMI Designer 7.8 -2018-04-25
CVE-2017-9634 Mitsubishi Electric E-Designer 安全漏洞 — E-Designer 9.8 -2018-04-17
CVE-2018-7517 Omron CX-Supervisor 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Omron CX-Supervisor 5.3 -2018-03-21
CVE-2018-1171 Joyent SmartOS 缓冲区错误漏洞 — Joyent SmartOS 7.0 -2018-03-19
CVE-2017-16747 Delta Industrial Automation Screen Editor 安全漏洞 — Delta Electronics Delta Industrial Automation Screen Editor 7.8 -2018-03-15
CVE-2017-17410 Bitdefender Internet Security 安全漏洞 — Bitdefender Internet Security 8.8 -2017-12-21
CVE-2017-9938 Siemens SIMATIC Logon 安全漏洞 — SIMATIC Logon All versions before V1.6 7.5 -2017-08-08
CVE-2017-7523 Cygwin 缓冲区错误漏洞 — cygwin 7.5 -2017-07-21
CVE-2017-6867 多款Siemens产品输入验证漏洞 — Siemens SIMATIC WinCC 4.9 -2017-05-11

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.