Logo
-

Byte Open Security

(ByteOS Network)

Log In

Sign Up

ByteOS

Security
Vulnerability Details
Registries
Custom Views
Weaknesses
Attack Patterns
Filters & Tools
CWE-174:Double Decoding of the Same Data
Weakness ID:174
Version:v4.17
Weakness Name:Double Decoding of the Same Data
Vulnerability Mapping:Allowed
Abstraction:Variant
Structure:Simple
Status:Draft
Likelihood of Exploit:
DetailsContent HistoryObserved CVE ExamplesReports
▼Description

The product decodes the same input twice, which can limit the effectiveness of any protection mechanism that occurs in between the decoding operations.

▼Extended Description

▼Alternate Terms
▼Relationships
Relevant to the view"Research Concepts - (1000)"
NatureMappingTypeIDName
ChildOfAllowed-with-ReviewC172Encoding Error
ChildOfAllowed-with-ReviewC675Multiple Operations on Resource in Single-Operation Context
Nature: ChildOf
Mapping: Allowed-with-Review
Type: Class
ID: 172
Name: Encoding Error
Nature: ChildOf
Mapping: Allowed-with-Review
Type: Class
ID: 675
Name: Multiple Operations on Resource in Single-Operation Context
▼Memberships
NatureMappingTypeIDName
MemberOfProhibitedV884CWE Cross-section
MemberOfProhibitedC992SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Input Transformation
MemberOfProhibitedC1407Comprehensive Categorization: Improper Neutralization
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:View
ID: 884
Name: CWE Cross-section
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-284Output Encoding Strategy
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-294Not Language-Specific Weaknesses
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-311Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands (impact)
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-316Bypass Protection Mechanism (impact)
MemberOfProhibitedBSBOSS-326Varies by Context (impact)
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-279
Name: Input Validation Strategy
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-284
Name: Output Encoding Strategy
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-294
Name: Not Language-Specific Weaknesses
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-311
Name: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands (impact)
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-316
Name: Bypass Protection Mechanism (impact)
Nature: MemberOf
Mapping: Prohibited
Type:BOSSView
ID: BOSS-326
Name: Varies by Context (impact)
▼Relevant To View
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
Access ControlConfidentialityAvailabilityIntegrityOtherN/ABypass Protection MechanismExecute Unauthorized Code or CommandsVaries by Context
N/A
Scope: Access Control, Confidentiality, Availability, Integrity, Other
Likelihood: N/A
Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Varies by Context
Note:
N/A
▼Potential Mitigations
Phase:Architecture and Design
Mitigation ID: MIT-44
Strategy: Input Validation
Effectiveness:
Description:

Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.

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-30
Strategy: Output Encoding
Effectiveness:
Description:

Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.

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-2004-1315
Forum software improperly URL decodes the highlight parameter when extracting text to highlight, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code by double-encoding the highlight value so that special characters are inserted into the result.
CVE-2004-1939
XSS protection mechanism attempts to remove "/" that could be used to close tags, but it can be bypassed using double encoded slashes (%252F)
CVE-2001-0333
Directory traversal using double encoding.
CVE-2004-1938
"%2527" (double-encoded single quote) used in SQL injection.
CVE-2005-1945
Double hex-encoded data.
CVE-2005-0054
Browser executes HTML at higher privileges via URL with hostnames that are double hex encoded, which are decoded twice to generate a malicious hostname.
Reference: CVE-2004-1315
Description:
Forum software improperly URL decodes the highlight parameter when extracting text to highlight, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code by double-encoding the highlight value so that special characters are inserted into the result.
Reference: CVE-2004-1939
Description:
XSS protection mechanism attempts to remove "/" that could be used to close tags, but it can be bypassed using double encoded slashes (%252F)
Reference: CVE-2001-0333
Description:
Directory traversal using double encoding.
Reference: CVE-2004-1938
Description:
"%2527" (double-encoded single quote) used in SQL injection.
Reference: CVE-2005-1945
Description:
Double hex-encoded data.
Reference: CVE-2005-0054
Description:
Browser executes HTML at higher privileges via URL with hostnames that are double hex encoded, which are decoded twice to generate a malicious hostname.
▼Affected Resources
    ▼Functional Areas
      ▼Weakness Ordinalities
      OrdinalityDescription
      ▼Detection Methods
      ▼Vulnerability Mapping Notes
      Usage:Allowed
      Reason:Acceptable-Use
      Rationale:

      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.

      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
      Research Gap

      Probably under-studied.

      N/A

      ▼Taxonomy Mappings
      Taxonomy NameEntry IDFitEntry Name
      PLOVERN/AN/ADouble Encoding
      Taxonomy Name: PLOVER
      Entry ID: N/A
      Fit: N/A
      Entry Name: Double Encoding
      ▼Related Attack Patterns
      IDName
      ▼References
      Details not found