Reino: Encapsulation

La encapsulación consiste en crear límites fuertes. En un explorador web esto puede suponer la seguridad de que tu codificación móvil no se vea comprometido por otro código móvil. En el servidor puede significar la diferenciación entre los datos validados y los que no lo están, entre los datos de un usuario y los de otro, o entre los diferentes usuarios, los datos que pueden ver y los que no.

110 elementos encontrados
Debilidades
Abstract
Los archivos de proxy en JavaScript generados de forma automática pueden tener pérdidas de información del sistema, ya que enumeran todos los métodos expuestos en los concentradores.
Explanation
Si no desea incluir todos los concentradores y métodos en el archivo de proxy en JavaScript de cada usuario, puede desactivar la generación automática del archivo. Puede decidirse por esta opción si tiene múltiples concentradores y métodos, pero no desea que cada usuario esté al tanto de todos los métodos.
References
[1] Introduction to SignalR Security
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 497
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [17] CWE ID 200
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001312, CCI-001314, CCI-002420
[8] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[9] 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)
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, SI-11 Error Handling
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.3 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 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 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[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.dotnet.system_information_leak_signalr_exposed_javascript_proxy
Abstract
La habilitación de actuadores de Spring Boot puede revelar datos del sistema e información de depuración que puede ayudar a un adversario a obtener información sobre el sistema y a elaborar un plan de ataque.
Explanation
Los actuadores de Spring Boot permiten a los usuarios supervisar la aplicación e interactuar con ella. Hay diferentes actuadores integrados que exponen datos del sistema e información de depuración a través de puntos finales HTTP, JMX o incluso mediante un shell remoto (SSH o Telnet). Los atacantes pueden beneficiarse de esta información para obtener información del sistema y recopilar información que podría usarse para atacar la aplicación.
References
[1] Spring Boot Reference Guide Spring
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 497
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [17] CWE ID 200
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001312, CCI-001314, CCI-002420, CCI-003272
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement (P1), SA-15 Development Process and Standards and Tools (P2), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1), SI-11 Error Handling (P2)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement, SA-15 Development Process and Standards and Tools, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, SI-11 Error Handling
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.3 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.5
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3620 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3620 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3620 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3620 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3620 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3620 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3620 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[57] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.config.java.system_information_leak_spring_boot_actuators_enabled
Abstract
Revelar datos del sistema o la información de depuración ayuda a un adversario a obtener información sobre el sistema y a elaborar un plan de ataque.
Explanation
Se produce una pérdida de información cuando los datos del sistema o la información de depuración abandonan el programa a través de una secuencia de salida o de una función de registro.

En este caso, Struts 2 Config Browser está configurado en el archivo pom.xml de Maven, por lo que está disponible y se implementa junto con la aplicación.

El complemento Config Browser es una herramienta de depuración para ayudar a ver la configuración de una aplicación en tiempo de ejecución. Es muy útil a la hora de depurar problemas que podrían estar relacionados con problemas de configuración, pero expone demasiados detalles que pueden ayudar a un atacante a asignar y modelar la aplicación.
References
[1] Struts Config Browser Plugin Apache Software Foundation
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 497
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [17] CWE ID 200
[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001312, CCI-001314, CCI-002420, CCI-003272
[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 CM
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement (P1), SA-15 Development Process and Standards and Tools (P2), SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity (P1), SI-11 Error Handling (P2)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement, SA-15 Development Process and Standards and Tools, SC-8 Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, SI-11 Error Handling
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API8 Security Misconfiguration
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 14.3.3 Unintended Security Disclosure Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A10 Insecure Configuration Management
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A6 Information Leakage and Improper Error Handling
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A5 Security Misconfiguration
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A6 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.10
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.5
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.5
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.6 - Sensitive Data Retention
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3620 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3620 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3620 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3620 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3620 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3620 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3620 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002480 CAT II, APSC-DV-002570 CAT II, APSC-DV-002580 CAT II, APSC-DV-003235 CAT II
[56] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[57] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.config.java.system_information_leak_apache_struts2
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.
Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código C# acepta una solicitud HTTP y almacena el parámetro usrname en el objeto de sesión HTTP antes de asegurarse de si el usuario se ha autenticado.


usrname = request.Item("usrname");
if (session.Item(ATTR_USR) == null) {
session.Add(ATTR_USR, usrname);
}


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.dotnet.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código Java acepta una solicitud HTTP y almacena el parámetro usrname en el objeto de sesión HTTP antes de asegurarse de si el usuario se ha autenticado.


usrname = request.getParameter("usrname");
if (session.getAttribute(ATTR_USR) != null) {
session.setAttribute(ATTR_USR, usrname);
}


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.java.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código transmite un elemento (URL) que no es de confianza de un script JavaScript de extensión de iOS al código de extensión de iOS.


var GetURL = function() {};
GetURL.prototype = {
run: function(arguments) {
...
arguments.completionFunction({ "URL": document.location.href });
}
...
};
var ExtensionPreprocessingJS = new GetURL;


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.javascript.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que es confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Kotlin acepta una solicitud HTTP y almacena el parámetro usrname en el objeto de sesión HTTP antes de asegurarse de si el usuario se ha autenticado.


val usrname: String = request.getParameter("usrname")
if (session.getAttribute(ATTR_USR) != null) {
session.setAttribute(ATTR_USR, usrname)
}


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] FUNDAMENTALS-4: Establish trust boundaries Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.kotlin.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Un límite de confianza se puede considerar como una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código transmite un elemento que no es de confianza de una extensión de iOS a la webview del host.


#import <MobileCoreServices/MobileCoreServices.h>

- (IBAction)done {
...
[self.extensionContext completeRequestReturningItems:@[untrustedItem] completionHandler:nil];
}


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.objc.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.
Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código acepta una cookie usrname y almacena el valor en la sesión HTTP DB antes de que compruebe que el usuario se ha autenticado.


...
IF (OWA_COOKIE.get('usrname').num_vals != 0) THEN
usrname := OWA_COOKIE.get('usrname').vals(1);
END IF;
IF (v('ATTR_USR') IS null) THEN
HTMLDB_UTIL.set_session_state('ATTR_USR', usrname);
END IF;
...


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.sql.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código Python acepta una solicitud HTTP y almacena el parámetro username en el objeto de sesión HTTP antes de asegurarse de si el usuario se ha autenticado.


uname = request.GET['username']
request.session['username'] = uname


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.python.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Un límite de confianza se puede considerar como una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código transmite un elemento que no es de confianza de una extensión de iOS a la webview del host.


import MobileCoreServices

@IBAction func done() {
...
self.extensionContext!.completeRequestReturningItems([unstrustedItem], completionHandler: nil)
}


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.swift.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El uso combinado de datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos fomenta que los programadores confíen por error en datos no validados.
Explanation
Se puede establecer un límite de confianza, del mismo modo que dibujar una línea que atraviesa un programa. A un lado de la línea, se encuentran los datos que no son de confianza. En el otro, están los datos que se presuponen confiables. La finalidad de la lógica de validación consiste en permitir que los datos crucen con seguridad el límite de confianza, pasando del lado no confiable al de confianza.

Se puede producir una infracción del límite de confianza cuando un programa difumina la línea entre lo que no es de confianza y lo que confiable. La forma más frecuente de cometer este error es permitir que se mezclen datos de confianza con otros que no lo son en la misma estructura de datos.

Ejemplo 1: El siguiente código acepta una solicitud HTTP y almacena el parámetro usrname en el objeto de sesión HTTP antes de asegurarse de si el usuario se ha autenticado.


...
Dim Response As Response
Dim Request As Request
Dim Session As Session
Dim Application As Application
Dim Server As Server
Dim usrname as Variant
Set Response = objContext("Response")
Set Request = objContext("Request")
Set Session = objContext("Session")
Set Application = objContext("Application")

usrname = Request.Form("usrname")
If IsNull(Session("ATTR_USR")) Then
Session("ATTR_USR") = usrname
End If
...


Sin límites de confianza bien establecidos y conservados, los programadores perderán inevitablemente la noción de los datos que se han validado y aquellos que no. A la larga, esta confusión permitirá que se utilicen algunos datos sin validarlos primero.
References
[1] M. Howard, D. LeBlanc Writing Secure Code, Second Edition Microsoft Press
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 501
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001084, CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-3 Security Function Isolation (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-3 Security Function Isolation, SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M8 Security Decisions Via Untrusted Inputs
[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, MASVS-PLATFORM-1
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A04 Insecure Design
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-002360 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)
desc.dataflow.vb.trust_boundary_violation
Abstract
El programa infringe los principio de codificación segura para código móvil devolviendo una variable de matriz private desde un método de acceso public.
Explanation
Devolver una variable de matriz private desde un método de acceso public permite que el código de llamada modifique el contenido de la matriz, dando a la matriz acceso public y contradiciendo las intenciones del programador que la hizo private.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Applet de Java devuelve incorrectamente una matriz private desde un método de acceso public.


public final class urlTool extends Applet {
private URL[] urls;
public URL[] getURLs() {
return urls;
}
...
}


El código móvil, en este caso un Applet de Java, es el código que se transmite por una red y se ejecuta en un equipo remoto. Como los desarrolladores de código móvil tienen poco o ningún control sobre el entorno en el que su código se va a ejecutar, aparecen preocupaciones especiales en materia de seguridad. Una de las mayores amenazas del entorno proceden del riesgo de que el código móvil se ejecute a la par con otro código móvil, potencialmente malintencionado. Como todos los exploradores web más populares ejecutan código desde varios orígenes juntos en el mismo JVM, muchas de estas instrucciones de seguridad para el código móvil se centran en evitar la manipulación del estado y el comportamiento de sus objetos por parte de adversarios que tienen acceso a la misma máquina virtual en la que se ejecuta su programa.
References
[1] G. McGraw Securing Java. Chapter 7: Java Security Guidelines
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 495
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[15] 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
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_access_violation
Abstract
Los Applets que realizan operaciones de base de datos JDBC en un entorno no confiable pueden comprometer las credenciales de la base de datos.
Explanation
De forma predeterminada, los Applets de Java tienen permitido abrir las conexiones de base de datos en el servidor desde donde se descargan. Esto es aceptable en entornos confiables; sin embargo, en los entornos no confiables los atacantes pueden usar el Applet para detectar credenciales de base de datos y finalmente obtener acceso a la base de datos directamente.
Ejemplo 1: el código siguiente muestra una contraseña de base de datos codificada de forma rígida que se está usando en un applet.

public class CustomerServiceApplet extends JApplet
{
public void paint(Graphics g)
{
...
conn = DriverManager.getConnection ("jdbc:mysql://db.example.com/customerDB", "csr", "p4ssw0rd");
...


Los usuarios de un Applet con credenciales JDBC codificadas de forma rígida pueden detectar fácilmente las credenciales, ya que el código de Applet se descarga en el cliente. Además, si la conexión de base de datos se realiza por un canal no cifrado, cualquiera que sea capaz de examinar el tráfico de red también puede obtener las credenciales. Finalmente, permitir a los usuarios conectarse directamente a una base de datos revela la presencia de un servidor de base de datos accesible públicamente, que permite a los atacantes centrarse en la base de datos para ataques de red directos.
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 305
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [13] CWE ID 287
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [14] CWE ID 287
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [14] CWE ID 287
[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [14] CWE ID 287
[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [13] CWE ID 287
[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [14] CWE ID 287
[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 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), 3.7.1 Defenses Against Session Management Exploits (L1 L2 L3), 9.2.3 Server Communications Security Requirements (L2 L3)
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[21] 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
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_database_access
Abstract
El programa infringe los principios de codificación segura para código móvil usando una clase interna.
Explanation
Las clases internas introducen discretamente varios problemas de seguridad por la forma en que se traducen en código de bytes Java. En el código fuente Java, parece ser que una clase interna se puede declarar para que sea accesible solo para clase envolvente. Sin embargo, como el código de bytes de Java no tiene concepto de clase interna, el compilador debe transformar una declaración de clase interna en una clase del mismo nivel, con un nivel de acceso de package a la clase externa original. Es más, como una clase interna puede acceder a campos private en su clase envolvente, una vez que una clase interna se convierte en otra del mismo nivel en código de bytes, el compilador convierte los campos private a los que accede la clase interna en campos protected.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Applet de Java utiliza incorrectamente una clase interna.


public final class urlTool extends Applet {
private final class urlHelper {
...
}
...
}


El código móvil, en este caso un Applet de Java, es el código que se transmite por una red y se ejecuta en un equipo remoto. Como los desarrolladores de código móvil tienen poco o ningún control sobre el entorno en el que su código se va a ejecutar, aparecen preocupaciones especiales en materia de seguridad. Una de las mayores amenazas del entorno proceden del riesgo de que el código móvil se ejecute a la par con otro código móvil, potencialmente malintencionado. Como todos los exploradores web más populares ejecutan código desde varios orígenes juntos en el mismo JVM, muchas de estas instrucciones de seguridad para el código móvil se centran en evitar la manipulación del estado y el comportamiento de sus objetos por parte de adversarios que tienen acceso a la misma máquina virtual en la que se ejecuta su programa.
References
[1] G. McGraw Securing Java. Chapter 7: Java Security Guidelines
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 492
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] 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
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_inner_class
Abstract
El programa infringe los principios de codificación segura para código móvil declarando un método finalize() como public.
Explanation
Un programa nunca debería llamar la finalización de forma explícita, salvo llamar super.finalize() dentro de una implementación de finalize(). En situaciones de código móvil, la práctica errónea de recolección manual de elementos no utilizados puede convertirse en una amenaza para la seguridad si un atacante es capaz de invocar de forma malintencionada uno de sus métodos finalize() porque se ha declarado con acceso public. Si está utilizando finalize() tal cual se diseñó, no hay motivos para declarar finalize() con otro acceso que no sea protected.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Applet de Java declara incorrectamente un método public finalize().


public final class urlTool extends Applet {
public void finalize() {
...
}
...
}


El código móvil, en este caso un Applet de Java, es el código que se transmite por una red y se ejecuta en un equipo remoto. Como los desarrolladores de código móvil tienen poco o ningún control sobre el entorno en el que su código se va a ejecutar, aparecen preocupaciones especiales en materia de seguridad. Una de las mayores amenazas del entorno proceden del riesgo de que el código móvil se ejecute a la par con otro código móvil, potencialmente malintencionado. Como todos los exploradores web más populares ejecutan código desde varios orígenes juntos en el mismo JVM, muchas de estas instrucciones de seguridad para el código móvil se centran en evitar la manipulación del estado y el comportamiento de sus objetos por parte de adversarios que tienen acceso a la misma máquina virtual en la que se ejecuta su programa.
References
[1] G. McGraw Securing Java. Chapter 7: Java Security Guidelines
[2] MET12-J. Do not use finalizers CERT
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 583
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[15] 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
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_public_finalize_method
Abstract
El programa infringe los principios de codificación segura para código móvil declarando una matriz public, final y static.
Explanation
En la mayoría de los casos una matriz declarada public, final y static es un error. Como las matrices son objetos mutables, la restricción final requiere que el propio objeto de matriz se asigne una sola vez, pero no garantiza los valores de los elementos de matriz. Como la matriz es pública, un programa malintencionado podría cambiar los valores almacenados en ella. En la mayoría de los casos, la matriz debe hacerse private.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Applet de Java declara incorrectamente una matriz public, final y static.


public final class urlTool extends Applet {
public final static URL[] urls;
...
}


El código móvil, en este caso un Applet de Java, es el código que se transmite por una red y se ejecuta en un equipo remoto. Como los desarrolladores de código móvil tienen poco o ningún control sobre el entorno en el que su código se va a ejecutar, aparecen preocupaciones especiales en materia de seguridad. Una de las mayores amenazas del entorno proceden del riesgo de que el código móvil se ejecute a la par con otro código móvil, potencialmente malintencionado. Como todos los exploradores web más populares ejecutan código desde varios orígenes juntos en el mismo JVM, muchas de estas instrucciones de seguridad para el código móvil se centran en evitar la manipulación del estado y el comportamiento de sus objetos por parte de adversarios que tienen acceso a la misma máquina virtual en la que se ejecuta su programa.
References
[1] G. McGraw Securing Java. Chapter 7: Java Security Guidelines
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 582
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[4] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] 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
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_unsafe_array_declaration
Abstract
El programa infringe los principios de codificación segura para el código móvil declarando una variable de miembro public pero no final.
Explanation
Todas las variables de miembro public de un Applet y las clases usadas por un Applet se deben declarar final para impedir que un atacante manipule u obtenga acceso no autorizado al estado interno del Applet.

Ejemplo 1: el siguiente código Applet de Java declara incorrectamente una variable de miembro public pero no final.


public final class urlTool extends Applet {
public URL url;
...
}


El código móvil, en este caso un Applet de Java, es el código que se transmite por una red y se ejecuta en un equipo remoto. Como los desarrolladores de código móvil tienen poco o ningún control sobre el entorno en el que su código se va a ejecutar, aparecen preocupaciones especiales en materia de seguridad. Una de las mayores amenazas del entorno proceden del riesgo de que el código móvil se ejecute a la par con otro código móvil, potencialmente malintencionado. Como todos los exploradores web más populares ejecutan código desde varios orígenes juntos en el mismo JVM, muchas de estas instrucciones de seguridad para el código móvil se centran en evitar la manipulación del estado y el comportamiento de sus objetos por parte de adversarios que tienen acceso a la misma máquina virtual en la que se ejecuta su programa.
References
[1] G. McGraw Securing Java. Chapter 7: Java Security Guidelines
[2] MUTABLE-8: Define wrapper methods around modifiable internal state Oracle
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 493
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-000213, CCI-002165
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 AC-3 Access Enforcement (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 AC-3 Access Enforcement
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[15] 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
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.2 APSC-DV-000460 CAT I, APSC-DV-000470 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
desc.structural.java.unsafe_mobile_code_unsafe_public_field