Informations de base
When a field is declared public but not final, the field can be read and written to by arbitrary Java code.
Modes d'introduction
Implementation
Plateformes applicables
Langue
Name: C++ (Undetermined)
Name: Java (Undetermined)
Conséquences courantes
Portée |
Impact |
Probabilité |
Integrity | Modify Application Data
Note: The object could potentially be tampered with. | |
Confidentiality | Read Application Data
Note: The object could potentially allow the object to be read. | |
Mesures d’atténuation potentielles
Phases : Architecture and Design
Clearly identify the scope for all critical data elements, including whether they should be regarded as static.
Phases : Implementation
Make any static fields private and constant.
A constant field is denoted by the keyword 'const' in C/C++ and ' final' in Java
Méthodes 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.)
Efficacité : High
Notes de cartographie des vulnérabilités
Justification : This CWE entry is at the Variant 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.
Références
REF-18
The CLASP Application Security Process
Secure Software, Inc..
https://cwe.mitre.org/documents/sources/TheCLASPApplicationSecurityProcess.pdf
Soumission
Nom |
Organisation |
Date |
Date de publication |
Version |
CLASP |
|
2006-07-19 +00:00 |
2006-07-19 +00:00 |
Draft 3 |
Modifications
Nom |
Organisation |
Date |
Commentaire |
Eric Dalci |
Cigital |
2008-07-01 +00:00 |
updated Time_of_Introduction |
|
KDM Analytics |
2008-08-01 +00:00 |
added/updated white box definitions |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2008-09-08 +00:00 |
updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2008-11-05 +00:00 |
Significant clarification of this entry, and improved examples. |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2008-11-24 +00:00 |
updated Background_Details, Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Name, Other_Notes, Potential_Mitigations |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2009-05-27 +00:00 |
updated Relationships |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2011-06-01 +00:00 |
updated Common_Consequences, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2012-05-11 +00:00 |
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2012-10-30 +00:00 |
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Potential_Mitigations |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2014-07-30 +00:00 |
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2017-11-08 +00:00 |
updated White_Box_Definitions |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2019-01-03 +00:00 |
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2020-02-24 +00:00 |
updated References, Relationships |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2023-04-27 +00:00 |
updated Detection_Factors, Relationships |
CWE Content Team |
MITRE |
2023-06-29 +00:00 |
updated Mapping_Notes |