CWE-128 Detail

CWE-128

Wrap-around Error
Gemiddeld
Incomplete
2006-07-19
00h00 +00:00
2025-12-11
00h00 +00:00
CWE Mitre.org
Meldingen voor een CWE
Blijf op de hoogte van wijzigingen voor een specifieke CWE.
Meldingen beheren

Naam: Wrap-around Error

Wrap around errors occur whenever a value is incremented past the maximum value for its type and therefore "wraps around" to a very small, negative, or undefined value.

Algemene informatie

Achtergrondinformatie

Introductiemodi

Implementation

Toepasselijke platforms

Taal

Name: C (Often)
Name: C++ (Often)

Veelvoorkomende gevolgen

Bereik Impact Waarschijnlijkheid
AvailabilityDoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU), DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory), DoS: Instability

Note: This weakness will generally lead to undefined behavior and therefore crashes. In the case of overflows involving loop index variables, the likelihood of infinite loops is also high.
IntegrityModify Memory

Note: If the value in question is important to data (as opposed to flow), simple data corruption has occurred. Also, if the wrap around results in other conditions such as buffer overflows, further memory corruption may occur.
Confidentiality
Availability
Access Control		Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Bypass Protection Mechanism

Note: This weakness can sometimes trigger buffer overflows which can be used to execute arbitrary code. This is usually outside the scope of a program's implicit security policy.

Mogelijke risicobeperkingen

Requirements specification: The choice could be made to use a language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Phases : Architecture and Design
Provide clear upper and lower bounds on the scale of any protocols designed.
Phases : Implementation
Perform validation on all incremented variables to ensure that they remain within reasonable bounds.

Detectiemethoden

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.)
Effectiviteit : High

Notities kwetsbaarheidsmapping

Rechtvaardiging : 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.
Opmerking : 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.

Gerelateerde aanvalspatronen

CAPEC-ID Naam aanvalspatroon
CAPEC-92 Forced Integer Overflow
This attack forces an integer variable to go out of range. The integer variable is often used as an offset such as size of memory allocation or similarly. The attacker would typically control the value of such variable and try to get it out of range. For instance the integer in question is incremented past the maximum possible value, it may wrap to become a very small, or negative number, therefore providing a very incorrect value which can lead to unexpected behavior. At worst the attacker can execute arbitrary code.

Notities

The relationship between overflow and wrap-around needs to be examined more closely, since several entries (including CWE-190) are closely related.

Referenties

REF-44

24 Deadly Sins of Software Security
Michael Howard, David LeBlanc, John Viega.

REF-62

The Art of Software Security Assessment
Mark Dowd, John McDonald, Justin Schuh.

REF-18

The CLASP Application Security Process
Secure Software, Inc..
https://cwe.mitre.org/documents/sources/TheCLASPApplicationSecurityProcess.pdf

Indiening

Naam Organisatie Datum Releasedatum Version
CLASP 2006-07-19 +00:00 2006-07-19 +00:00 Draft 3

Wijzigingen

Naam Organisatie Datum Opmerking
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-09-08 +00:00 updated Applicable_Platforms, Background_Details, Common_Consequences, Relationships, Relationship_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-11-24 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-10-29 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2010-12-13 +00:00 updated Background_Details
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-06-01 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-09-13 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-05-11 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, References, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2014-07-30 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2017-01-19 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2017-11-08 +00:00 updated Causal_Nature, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2020-02-24 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2021-03-15 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations, References
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-04-27 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-06-29 +00:00 updated Mapping_Notes
CWE Content Team MITRE 2025-12-11 +00:00 updated Detection_Factors
De informatie die op CVE Find wordt gepresenteerd, is afkomstig van verschillende zorgvuldig geselecteerde referentiebronnen. CVE-gegevens worden geleverd door MITRE Corporation en de National Vulnerability Database (NVD). De Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV)-catalogus is afkomstig van de Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), terwijl EPSS-scores afkomstig zijn van FIRST.org. Daarnaast worden gegevens over softwarezwakheden (CWE) en veelvoorkomende aanvalspatronen (CAPEC) bijgehouden door MITRE Corporation, en informatie over hardware- en softwareconfiguraties (CPE) wordt geleverd door de NVD.