Logo
-

Byte Open Security

(ByteOS Network)

Log In

Sign Up

ByteOS

Security
Vulnerability Details
Registries
Custom Views
Weaknesses
Attack Patterns
Filters & Tools
CWE-166:Improper Handling of Missing Special Element
Weakness ID:166
Version:v4.17
Weakness Name:Improper Handling of Missing Special Element
Vulnerability Mapping:Allowed
Abstraction:Base
Structure:Simple
Status:Draft
Likelihood of Exploit:
DetailsContent HistoryObserved CVE ExamplesReports
▼Description

The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not handle or incorrectly handles when an expected special element is missing.

▼Extended Description

▼Alternate Terms
▼Relationships
Relevant to the view"Research Concepts - (1000)"
NatureMappingTypeIDName
ChildOfAllowed-with-ReviewC159Improper Handling of Invalid Use of Special Elements
ChildOfAllowed-with-ReviewC228Improper Handling of Syntactically Invalid Structure
Nature: ChildOf
Mapping: Allowed-with-Review
Type: Class
ID: 159
Name: Improper Handling of Invalid Use of Special Elements
Nature: ChildOf
Mapping: Allowed-with-Review
Type: Class
ID: 228
Name: Improper Handling of Syntactically Invalid Structure
▼Memberships
NatureMappingTypeIDName
MemberOfProhibitedC19Data Processing Errors
MemberOfProhibitedC722OWASP Top Ten 2004 Category A1 - Unvalidated Input
MemberOfProhibitedC992SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Input Transformation
MemberOfProhibitedC1407Comprehensive Categorization: Improper Neutralization
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:Category
ID: 19
Name: Data Processing Errors
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:Category
ID: 722
Name: OWASP Top Ten 2004 Category A1 - Unvalidated Input
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:Category
ID: 992
Name: SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Input Transformation
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:Category
ID: 1407
Name: Comprehensive Categorization: Improper Neutralization
▼Tags
NatureMappingTypeIDName
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-279Input Validation Strategy
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-294Not Language-Specific Weaknesses
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-324DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart (impact)
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-279
Name: Input Validation Strategy
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-294
Name: Not Language-Specific Weaknesses
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-324
Name: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart (impact)
▼Relevant To View
Relevant to the view"Software Development - (699)"
NatureMappingTypeIDName
MemberOfProhibitedC19Data Processing Errors
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type: Category
ID: 19
Name: Data Processing Errors
Relevant to the view"Software Fault Pattern (SFP) Clusters - (888)"
NatureMappingTypeIDName
MemberOfProhibitedC992SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Input Transformation
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type: Category
ID: 992
Name: SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Input Transformation
▼Background Detail

▼Common Consequences
ScopeLikelihoodImpactNote
AvailabilityN/ADoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
N/A
Scope: Availability
Likelihood: N/A
Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
Note:
N/A
▼Potential Mitigations
Phase:
Mitigation ID:
Strategy:
Effectiveness:
Description:

Developers should anticipate that special elements will be removed in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.

Note:


Phase:Implementation
Mitigation ID: MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
Effectiveness:
Description:

Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.

When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."

Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

Note:


Phase:Implementation
Mitigation ID: MIT-20
Strategy: Input Validation
Effectiveness:
Description:

Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.

Note:

▼Modes Of Introduction
Phase: Implementation
Note:

N/A

▼Applicable Platforms
Languages
Class: Not Language-Specific(Undetermined Prevalence)
▼Demonstrative Examples
▼Observed Examples
ReferenceDescription
CVE-2002-1362
Crash via message type without separator character
CVE-2002-0729
Missing special character (separator) causes crash
CVE-2002-1532
HTTP GET without \r\n\r\n CRLF sequences causes product to wait indefinitely and prevents other users from accessing it
Reference: CVE-2002-1362
Description:
Crash via message type without separator character
Reference: CVE-2002-0729
Description:
Missing special character (separator) causes crash
Reference: CVE-2002-1532
Description:
HTTP GET without \r\n\r\n CRLF sequences causes product to wait indefinitely and prevents other users from accessing it
▼Affected Resources
    ▼Functional Areas
      ▼Weakness Ordinalities
      OrdinalityDescription
      ▼Detection Methods
      ▼Vulnerability Mapping Notes
      Usage:Allowed
      Reason:Acceptable-Use
      Rationale:

      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.

      Comments:

      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.

      Suggestions:
      ▼Notes
      ▼Taxonomy Mappings
      Taxonomy NameEntry IDFitEntry Name
      PLOVERN/AN/AMissing Special Element
      Taxonomy Name: PLOVER
      Entry ID: N/A
      Fit: N/A
      Entry Name: Missing Special Element
      ▼Related Attack Patterns
      IDName
      ▼References
      Details not found