CWE-1284
Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
Incomplete
2020-02-24
00h00 +00:00
00h00 +00:00
2026-04-30
00h00 +00:00
00h00 +00:00
Notifications pour un CWE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CWE spécifique.
Nom: Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input
The product receives input that is expected to specify a quantity (such as size or length), but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the quantity has the required properties.
Informations générales
Modes d'introduction
Implementation : Since quantities are often used to affect resource allocation or process financial data, they are often present in many places in the code.Plateformes applicables
Langue
Class: Not Language-Specific (Often)Conséquences courantes
| Portée | Impact | Probabilité |
|---|---|---|
| Other Integrity Availability | Varies by Context, DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU), Modify Memory, Read Memory Note: When the quantity is not properly validated, then attackers can specify malicious quantities to cause excessive resource allocation, trigger unexpected failures, enable buffer overflows, etc. |
Exemples observés
| Références | Description |
|---|---|
CVE-2025-4037 | ATM simulator does not check for negative values with deposits or withdrawals, allowing attackers to increase their balance |
CVE-2025-46687 | Chain: Javascript engine code does not perform a length check (CWE-1284) leading to integer overflow (CWE-190) causing allocation of smaller buffer than expected (CWE-131) resulting in a heap-based buffer overflow (CWE-122) |
CVE-2019-19911 | Chain: Python library does not limit the resources used to process images that specify a very large number of bands (CWE-1284), leading to excessive memory consumption (CWE-789) or an integer overflow (CWE-190). |
CVE-2008-1440 | lack of validation of length field leads to infinite loop |
CVE-2008-2374 | lack of validation of string length fields allows memory consumption or buffer over-read |
Mesures d’atténuation potentielles
Phases : ImplementationMéthodes de détection
Automated Static Analysis
Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)Notes de cartographie des vulnérabilités
Justification : This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.Commentaire : Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.
Notes
This entry is still under development and will continue to see updates and content improvements.Soumission
| Nom | Organisation | Date | Date de publication | Version |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | 4.1 |
Modifications
| Nom | Organisation | Date | Commentaire |
|---|---|---|---|
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Detection_Factors, Modes_of_Introduction, Observed_Examples, Weakness_Ordinalities | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Demonstrative_Examples, Observed_Examples |
