CWE-177 URL编码处理不恰当（Hex编码）
Improper Handling of URL Encoding (Hex Encoding)
结构: Simple
Abstraction: Variant
状态: Draft
被利用可能性: unkown
基本描述
The software does not properly handle when all or part of an input has been URL encoded.
相关缺陷
-
cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 172 cwe_View_ID: 1000 cwe_Ordinal: Primary
-
cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 172 cwe_View_ID: 699 cwe_Ordinal: Primary
适用平台
Language: {'cwe_Class': 'Language-Independent', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}
常见的影响
| 范围 | 影响 | 注释 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrity | Unexpected State |
可能的缓解方案
MIT-44 Architecture and Design
策略: Input Validation
Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
MIT-5 Implementation
策略: Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a whitelist 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 (i.e., do not rely on a blacklist). A blacklist 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, blacklists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
MIT-20 Implementation
策略: Input Validation
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 whitelist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.
分析过的案例
| 标识 | 说明 | 链接 |
|---|---|---|
| CVE-2000-0900 | Hex-encoded path traversal variants - "%2e%2e", "%2e%2e%2f", "%5c%2e%2e" | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2000-0900 |
| CVE-2005-2256 | Hex-encoded path traversal variants - "%2e%2e", "%2e%2e%2f", "%5c%2e%2e" | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2256 |
| CVE-2004-2121 | Hex-encoded path traversal variants - "%2e%2e", "%2e%2e%2f", "%5c%2e%2e" | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-2121 |
| CVE-2004-0280 | "%20" (encoded space) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0280 |
| CVE-2003-0424 | "%20" (encoded space) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2003-0424 |
| CVE-2001-0693 | "%20" (encoded space) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2001-0693 |
| CVE-2001-0778 | "%20" (encoded space) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2001-0778 |
| CVE-2002-1831 | Crash via hex-encoded space "%20". | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1831 |
| CVE-2000-0671 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2000-0671 |
| CVE-2004-0189 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0189 |
| CVE-2002-1291 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1291 |
| CVE-2002-1031 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1031 |
| CVE-2001-1140 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2001-1140 |
| CVE-2004-0760 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0760 |
| CVE-2002-1025 | "%00" (encoded null) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1025 |
| CVE-2002-1213 | "%2f" (encoded slash) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1213 |
| CVE-2004-0072 | "%5c" (encoded backslash) and "%2e" (encoded dot) sequences | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0072 |
| CVE-2004-0847 | "%5c" (encoded backslash) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2004-0847 |
| CVE-2002-1575 | "%0a" (overlaps CRLF) | https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1575 |
分类映射
| 映射的分类名 | ImNode ID | Fit | Mapped Node Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLOVER | URL Encoding (Hex Encoding) |
相关攻击模式
- CAPEC-120
- CAPEC-468
- CAPEC-64
- CAPEC-72