界: API Abuse

API 是调用方和被调用方之间的约定。最常见的 API 滥用是由于调用方未能遵守此约定的终止导致的。例如,如果某个程序在调用 chroot() 后未能调用 chdir(),则违反了用于指定如何安全地更改活动根目录的约定。库滥用的另一个典型示例是期望被调用方向调用方返回可信的 DNS 信息。在这种情况下,调用方通过对被调用方行为做出某种假设(返回值可用于身份验证目的)滥用其 API。另一方也可能违反调用方-被调用方约定。例如,如果编码器子类化 SecureRandom 并返回一个非随机值,则将违反此约定。

83 个项目已找到
弱点
Abstract
该字段已标注为危险。所有对其的使用都将加注标记。
Explanation
已将注释 FortifyDangerous 应用于此字段。这被用来表示该类型危险,并且所有对其的使用都应进行安全性检查。
References
[1] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
desc.structural.java.dangerous_field
Abstract
永不应该使用那些无法安全使用的函数。
Explanation
某些函数不论如何使用都有危险性。这一类函数通常是在没有考虑安全问题的情况下就执行了。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 242
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.5
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 27-0-1
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 30.0.1
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.semantic.cpp.dangerous_function.master
Abstract
永不应该使用那些无法安全使用的函数。
Explanation
某些函数不论如何使用都有危险性。这一类函数通常是在没有考虑安全问题的情况下就执行了。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 242
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.5
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 27-0-1
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 30.0.1
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.semantic.php.dangerous_function.master
Abstract
永不应该使用那些无法安全使用的函数。
Explanation
DBMS_UTILITY.EXEC_DDL_STATEMENT 将仅执行归类为数据定义语言的一部分的指令。嵌入式 SQL 不支持的其他指令将在不提示的情况下忽略。当使用该程序时,这种行为将导致很难检测到错误。
References
[1] How to write SQL injection proof PL/SQL
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 242
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.5
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 27-0-1
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 30.0.1
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[18] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.semantic.sql.dangerous_function_exec_ddl
Abstract
不应该使用那些不能安全地使用或者很难执行相应操作的函数。
Explanation
某些函数以危险或意外的方式行事。这一类函数通常是在没有考虑安全问题的情况下就执行了。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 242
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.5
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 27-0-1
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 30.0.1
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[17] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.structural.ruby.dangerous_function
Abstract
永不应该使用那些无法安全使用的函数。
Explanation
某些函数不论如何使用都有危险性。这一类函数通常是在没有考虑安全问题的情况下就执行了。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 676
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002824
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Rule 1.5
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2008 Rule 18-0-5
[6] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C++ Guidelines 2023 Rule 21.2.2
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-16 Memory Protection (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-16 Memory Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A5 Buffer Overflow
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.5
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1
[14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.2
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.2
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.2
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[24] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002590 CAT I
[47] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Buffer Overflow (WASC-07)
[48] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Buffer Overflow
desc.semantic.cpp.dangerous_function_strcpy
Abstract
切勿使用无法安全使用的函数。
Explanation
某些函数无论以何种方式使用都具有危险性。通常会在不考虑安全性的情况下使用此类函数。

例 1:根据给出的 URL http://www.example.com/index.php?param=...,如果 URL 参数 param(代替“...”传递)与表示“零个或更多字母数字字符”的 POSIX 正则表达式 '^[[:alnum:]]*$' 相匹配,则 index.php 中 php 的以下片段会将其输出到屏幕中。

<?php
$pattern = '^[[:alnum:]]*$';
$string = $_GET['param'];
if (ereg($pattern, $string)) {
echo($string);
}
?>


虽然Example 1 可在使用字母数字输入的情况下正常运行,但由于使用不安全的 ereg() 函数来验证受破坏的输入,因此可能会通过注入 null 字节发动 Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) 攻击。如果为 param 传递一个值,而该值包含一个有效的字母数字字符串,并后跟 null 字节和 <script> 标签(例如 "Hello123%00<script>alert("XSS")</script>"),则 ereg($pattern, $string) 仍会返回 true,因为 ereg() 函数在读取输入字符串(从左至右)时会忽略 null 字节字符后面的所有内容。在此示例中,这意味着 null 字节之后注入的 <script> 标签将显示给用户并进行求值。
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 676
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT I
[14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
[19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP2060.4 CAT II, APP3590.2 CAT II
desc.semantic.php.dangerous_function_unsafe_regular_expression
Abstract
无法安全地使用函数 xp_cmdshell。不应该使用此函数。
Explanation
某些函数不论如何使用都有危险性。函数 xp_cmdshell 会启动 Windows 命令 shell 来执行提供的命令字符串。该命令会在默认系统中或提供的代理上下文中执行。但目前没有一种方法可将用户限制为只能执行一组预先指定的特权操作,为用户授予任何权限都会允许其执行任何命令字符串。
References
[1] xp_cmdshell
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 242
[3] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[4] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 7.1.2
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 7.1.2
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 7.1.2
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 7.2.2
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 7.2.2
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[14] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
[15] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 OS Commanding (WASC-31)
[16] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 OS Commanding
desc.semantic.sql.dangerous_function_xp_cmdshell
Abstract
该方法已标注为危险。所有对此方法的使用都会标记为问题。
Explanation
已将注释 FortifyDangerous 应用于此方法。这被用来表示该类型危险,并且所有对其的使用都应进行安全性检查。
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 749
[2] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[3] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 14.5.1 Validate HTTP Request Header Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[11] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[13] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 676
desc.structural.java.dangerous_method
Abstract
该变量属于已被注释为危险的类型。
Explanation
已将注释 FortifyDangerous 应用于此类型。这被用来表示该类型危险,并且所有对其的使用都应进行安全性检查。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[2] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.6
[3] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[4] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.6
[5] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.6
[6] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[7] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[8] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[9] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
[10] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection
desc.structural.java.dangerous_class_variable
Abstract
chroot() 系统调用的使用不当会让攻击者从 chroot 监牢中逃脱出来。
Explanation
chroot() 系统调用允许程序修改其 file system 根目录的含义。适当地调用 chroot() 后,程序无法访问在新的根目录下定义的目录树之外的任何文件。这样的环境称为 chroot 监牢,通常用来防止攻击者破坏进程,继而访问未经授权的文件。例如,在 chroot 监牢环境中运行多个 FTP 服务器,可以防止攻击者发现新服务器漏洞后下载密码文件或者其他系统中的敏感文件。

chroot() 的使用不当可能会让攻击者从 chroot 监牢中逃脱出来。因为 chroot() 函数的调用不会改变进程当前的工作目录,所以在调用 chroot() 之后,相对路径可能仍然会引用 chroot 监牢之外的 file system 资源。

例 1:考虑以下这段来自(假设的)FTP 服务器的源代码:


chroot("/var/ftproot");
...
fgets(filename, sizeof(filename), network);
localfile = fopen(filename, "r");
while ((len = fread(buf, 1, sizeof(buf), localfile)) != EOF) {
fwrite(buf, 1, sizeof(buf), network);
}
fclose(localfile);


这段代码负责从网络中读取文件名,然后将相应的文件在本地机器上打开,并通过网络传送内容。这段代码可用来执行 FTP GET 命令。FTP 服务器在其初始化例程中调用 chroot(),试图阻止对 /var/ftproot 之外的文件的访问。但因为服务器没有通过调用 chdir("/") 来更改当前的工作目录,所以攻击者可以请求文件的 "../../../../../etc/passwd”,并获取该系统密码文件的副本。
References
[1] J. Viega, G. McGraw Building Secure Software Addison-Wesley
[2] A. Chuvakin Using Chroot Securely
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 243
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2023 Directive 4.14
[6] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-STORAGE-2
[8] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Insufficient Authorization (WASC-02)
[9] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Insufficient Authorization
desc.semantic.cpp.directory_restriction
Abstract
程序使用了 AWT/Swing,这违反了企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范。
Explanation
企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范要求每个 bean 提供者都必须遵守一系列编程规范,以确保 bean 在任何 EJB 容器 [1] 中的可移植性与行为的一致性。

在这里,程序违背了以下 EJB 指导原则:

“一个企业级 bean 必须禁止利用 AWT 机制,将信息输出到显示设备,或者通过键盘输入信息。”

制定该规范理由如下:

“服务器不允许应用程序中的程序与连接至服务器系统上的键盘/显示设备进行直接交互。”
References
[1] Jakarta Enterprise Beans 4.0 Eclipse Foundation
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 575
desc.structural.java.ejb_bad_practices_use_of_awt_swing
Abstract
程序使用了程序类加载器,这违反了企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范。
Explanation
企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范要求每个 bean 提供者都必须遵守一系列编程规范,以确保 bean 在任何 EJB 容器 [1] 中的可移植性与行为的一致性。

在这里,程序违背了以下 EJB 指导原则:

“企业级 bean 必须禁止以下内容:创建类加载器;设置类加载器上下文;设置安全管理器;创建新的安全管理器;停止 JVM 或者更改输入、输出及错误流。”

制定该规范理由如下:

“这些功能都是为企业级 bean 容器预留的。允许企业级 bean 使用这些功能会造成一些安全漏洞,并使容器无法正确地管理运行时环境。”
References
[1] Jakarta Enterprise Beans 4.0 Eclipse Foundation
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 578
desc.structural.java.ejb_bad_practices_use_of_classloader
Abstract
程序使用了 java.io 包,这违反了企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范。
Explanation
企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范要求每个 bean 提供者都必须遵守一系列编程规范,以确保 bean 在任何 EJB 容器 [1] 中的可移植性与行为的一致性。

在这里,程序违背了以下 EJB 指导原则:

“当使用 Java I/O 包尝试访问文件系统中的文件和目录时,企业级 bean 应加以小心。”

制定该规范理由如下:

“文件系统 API 不太适合供业务组件访问数据。文件可能无法从所有实例中访问,或者文件的内容在不同的实例上可能有所不同,而且文件更新的协调工作也很困难。业务组件应当使用资源管理器 API(例如 JDBC)来存储数据。”
References
[1] Jakarta Enterprise Beans 4.0 Eclipse Foundation
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 576
desc.structural.java.ejb_bad_practices_use_of_java_io
Abstract
程序使用了 socket 接口,这违反了企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范。
Explanation
企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范要求每个 bean 提供者都必须遵守一系列编程规范,以确保 bean 在任何 EJB 容器 [1] 中的可移植性与行为的一致性。

在这里,程序违背了以下 EJB 指导原则:

“一个企业级 bean 必须禁止监听 Socket 接口、接受 Socket 连接或者使用 Socket 做多点传送。”

制定该规范理由如下:

“企业级 bean 体系结构允许企业级 bean 实例作为网络套接字客户端,但不允许它作为网络服务器。允许实例成为网络服务器将与企业级 bean 的基本功能(为企业级 bean 客户端提供服务)相冲突。”
References
[1] Jakarta Enterprise Beans 4.0 Eclipse Foundation
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 577
desc.structural.java.ejb_bad_practices_use_of_sockets
Abstract
程序使用了多线程同步,这违反了企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范。
Explanation
企业级 JavaBeans 编程规范要求每个 bean 提供者都必须遵守一系列编程规范,以确保 bean 在任何 EJB 容器 [1] 中的可移植性与行为的一致性。

在这里,程序违背了以下 EJB 指导原则:

“企业级 bean 不得使用线程同步原语来同步多个实例的执行,除非它是具有 bean 管理并发性的单例会话 bean。”

制定该规范理由如下:

“这一规则要求确保一致的运行时语义,因为一些企业级 bean 容器可能会使用单个 JVM 来执行所有企业级 bean 实例,而其他一些可能会跨多个 JVM 分布 bean 实例。”
References
[1] Jakarta Enterprise Beans 4.0 Eclipse Foundation
[2] THI01-J. Do not invoke ThreadGroup methods CERT
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 574
desc.structural.java.ejb_bad_practices_use_of_synchronization_primitives
Abstract
通过用户输入构建 FileResponse 实例可允许攻击者下载应用程序二进制码,或者查看受保护目录下的任意文件。
Explanation
在以下情况下,会发生文件泄露:
1. 数据从一个不可信赖的数据源进入程序。


2. 数据用于动态地构造一个路径。

例 1:以下代码接收不可信的数据并使用它打开返回给用户的文件。


from django.http import FileResponse
...
def file_disclosure(request):
path = request.GET['returnURL']
return FileResponse(open(path, 'rb'))
...


如果攻击者使用请求参数提供与某个敏感文件位置相匹配的 URL,他们将能够查看该文件。例如,使用 "http://www.yourcorp.com/webApp/logic?returnURL=settings.py" 将能够查看该应用程序的“settings.py”。
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 552
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[3] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.12.1 Secure File Upload Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.1 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[27] 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
[28] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 073
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
desc.dataflow.python.file_disclosure_django
Abstract
若通过用户输入构造服务器端重定向路径,攻击者便能够下载应用程序二进制码(包括应用程序的类或 jar 文件)或者查看受保护的目录下的任意文件。
Explanation
在以下情况下,会发生文件泄露:
1. 数据从一个不可信赖的数据源进入程序。


2. 数据用于动态地构造一个路径。

例 1:下面的代码会接受不可信赖的数据,并使用其构造服务器端转发所使用的路径。


...
String returnURL = request.getParameter("returnURL");
RequestDispatcher rd = request.getRequestDispatcher(returnURL);
rd.forward();
...
例 2:下面的代码会接受不可信赖的数据,并使用其构造服务器端转发所使用的路径。


...
<% String returnURL = request.getParameter("returnURL"); %>
<jsp:include page="<%=returnURL%>" />
...



如果攻击者使用请求参数提供与某个敏感文件位置相匹配的 URL,他们将能够查看该文件。例如,使用 "http://www.yourcorp.com/webApp/logic?returnURL=WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml" 将能够查看该应用程序的 applicationContext.xml 文件。
在攻击者掌握 applicationContext.xml 的信息之后,他们就能够定位和下载 applicationContext.xml 中引用的其他配置文件,甚至类文件或 jar 文件。这样一来,攻击者将能够获得与应用程序有关的敏感信息,并以之为目标发动其他类型的攻击。
References
[1] Ryan Berg and Dinis Cruz Two Security Vulnerabilities in the Spring Framework's MVC
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 552
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.12.1 Secure File Upload Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.1 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] 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
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 073
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
desc.dataflow.java.file_disclosure_j2ee
Abstract
若通过用户输入构造服务器端重定向路径,攻击者便能够下载应用程序二进制码(包括应用程序的类或 jar 文件)或者查看受保护的目录下的任意文件。
Explanation
在以下情况下,会发生文件泄露:
1. 数据从一个不可信赖的数据源进入程序。


2. 数据用于动态地构造一个路径。

例 1:下面的代码会接受不可信赖的数据,并使用其构造服务器端转发所使用的路径。


...
String returnURL = request.getParameter("returnURL");
return new ModelAndView(returnURL);
...


如果攻击者使用请求参数提供与某个敏感文件位置相匹配的 URL,他们将能够查看该文件。例如,使用 "http://www.yourcorp.com/webApp/logic?returnURL=WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml" 将能够查看该应用程序的 applicationContext.xml 文件。
在攻击者掌握 applicationContext.xml 的信息之后,他们就能够定位和下载 applicationContext.xml 中引用的其他配置文件,甚至类文件或 jar 文件。这样一来,攻击者将能够获得与应用程序有关的敏感信息,并以之为目标发动其他类型的攻击。
References
[1] Ryan Berg and Dinis Cruz Two Security Vulnerabilities in the Spring Framework's MVC
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 552
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.12.1 Secure File Upload Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.1 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] 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
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 073
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
desc.dataflow.java.file_disclosure_spring
Abstract
使用用户输入构建服务器端重定向路径可能会允许攻击者下载应用程序二进制文件(包括应用程序类或 jar 文件)或查看受保护目录中的任意文件。
Explanation
在 Spring Webflow 中,视图解析器用于将视图名称转换为实际的渲染技术。通常,视图解析器会通过使用前缀和后缀来限制文件的类型和位置。但是,使用请求参数指定视图名称可以绕过此机制。
示例 1:以下 Spring Webflow 配置使用请求参数来指定视图名称。

<webflow:end-state id="finalStep" view="${requestParameters.url}"/>
<webflow:view-state id="showView" view="${requestParameters.test}">

默认的 Spring Webflow 视图解析器仅允许解析“/WEB-INF/views/”中的 jsp 文件。


<bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.
InternalResourceViewResolver">
<property name="prefix" value="/WEB-INF/views/" />
<property name="suffix" value=".jsp" />
</bean>


攻击者可以使用以下 URL 查看 applicationContext.xml 文件:“http://www.yourcorp.com/webApp/logic?url=../applicationContext.xml;x=”
InternalResourceViewResolver 将使用其配置的前缀,然后连接在视图属性中传递的值,最后添加后缀。
生成的相对 URL(“/WEB-INF/views/../applicationContext.xml;x=.jsp”)将被传递到服务器端请求调度程序。攻击者可以利用分号将“.jsp”后缀转换为路径参数。攻击者可利用此攻击泄露 Web 应用程序根目录下的任何文件。
References
[1] Ryan Berg and Dinis Cruz Two Security Vulnerabilities in the Spring Framework's MVC
[2] Seth Ladd Expert Spring MVC and Web Flow
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 552
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[6] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.12.1 Secure File Upload Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.1 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control, Control Objective C.2.3 - Web Software Access Controls
[30] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 073
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[46] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
desc.configuration.java.file_disclosure_spring_webflow
Abstract
若通过用户输入构造服务器端重定向路径,攻击者便能够下载应用程序二进制码(包括应用程序的类或 jar 文件)或者查看受保护的目录下的任意文件。
Explanation
在以下情况下,会发生文件泄露:
1. 数据从一个不可信赖的数据源进入程序。


2. 数据用于动态地构造一个路径。

例 1:下面的代码会接受不可信赖的数据,并使用其构造服务器端转发所使用的路径。


...
String returnURL = request.getParameter("returnURL");
return new ActionForward(returnURL);
...


如果攻击者使用请求参数提供与某个敏感文件位置相匹配的 URL,他们将能够查看该文件。例如,使用 "http://www.yourcorp.com/webApp/logic?returnURL=WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml" 将能够查看该应用程序的 applicationContext.xml 文件。
在攻击者掌握 applicationContext.xml 的信息之后,他们就能够定位和下载 applicationContext.xml 中引用的其他配置文件,甚至类文件或 jar 文件。这样一来,攻击者将能够获得与应用程序有关的敏感信息,并以之为目标发动其他类型的攻击。
References
[1] Ryan Berg and Dinis Cruz Two Security Vulnerabilities in the Spring Framework's MVC
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 552
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [12] CWE ID 020
[4] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-002754
[5] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Access Violation
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)
[7] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SI-10 Information Input Validation
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP API 2023 API1 Broken Object Level Authorization
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.12.1 Secure File Upload Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 12.5.1 File Download Requirements (L1 L2 L3)
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M1 Weak Server Side Controls
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A1 Unvalidated Input
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A4 Insecure Direct Object Reference
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A4 Insecure Direct Object References
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A5 Broken Access Control
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A01 Broken Access Control
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.1
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.5.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.8
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.8
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.8
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 5.4 - Authentication and Access Control
[28] 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
[29] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 073
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002560 CAT I
[45] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 URL Redirector Abuse (WASC-38)
desc.dataflow.java.file_disclosure_struts
Abstract
不要使用 realloc() 来调整储存敏感信息的缓冲区大小。因为该函数可能会将敏感信息的副本遗留在内存中,而您又无法对这部分内存进行覆盖。
Explanation
当敏感数据(如密码或加密密钥)因为没有从内存中删除而被泄漏给攻击者时,就会发生 Heap inspection 漏洞。

realloc() 函数通常用来提高某个分配的内存块的大小。该操作经常要求将以前的内存块中的内容复制到新的且更大的内存块中。该操作会完整地保留原内存块中的内容,但不允许程序进行访问,这就使程序无法清除内存中的敏感数据。如果攻击者能够后期访问某个内存转储中的内容,敏感数据就会暴露。

示例 1:以下代码在一个包含敏感数据的缓冲区上调用了 realloc()


plaintext_buffer = get_secret();
...
plaintext_buffer = realloc(plaintext_buffer, 1024);
...
scrub_memory(plaintext_buffer, 1024);


这段代码试图清除内存中敏感数据,但因为使用了 realloc(),所以在原来对 plaintext_buffer 分配的内存中仍会看到该数据的副本。
References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 244
[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [4] CWE ID 200
[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [7] CWE ID 200
[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021 [20] CWE ID 200
[5] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001090, CCI-001199
[6] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 MP
[7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-4 Information in Shared Resources (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-4 Information in Shared System Resources, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 8.3.4 Sensitive Private Data (L1 L2 L3), 8.3.6 Sensitive Private Data (L2 L3)
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M6 Inadequate Privacy Controls
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-STORAGE-2
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 8.3.1
[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.3.2, Requirement 3.3.3, Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 8.3.1
[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention
[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention
[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3230.2 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3230.2 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3230.2 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3230.2 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3230.2 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3230.2 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3230.2 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 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.semantic.cpp.heap_inspection
Abstract
不要使用 VirtualLock 来锁定包含敏感数据的页面。因为该函数并不总会执行。
Explanation
当敏感数据(如密码或加密密钥)因为没有从内存中删除而被泄漏给攻击者时,就会发生 Heap inspection 漏洞。

VirtualLock 函数旨在锁定内存中的页面,以防这些页面在磁盘上被标注页码。然而,在 Windows 95/98/ME 操作系统上,这一函数仅作为桩函数使用,因而不会产生什么影响。

References
[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 591
[2] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001090, CCI-001199
[3] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 MP
[4] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data
[5] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 SC-4 Information in Shared Resources (P1), SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest (P1)
[6] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 SC-4 Information in Shared System Resources, SC-28 Protection of Information at Rest
[7] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M4 Unintended Data Leakage
[8] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M6 Inadequate Privacy Controls
[9] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-STORAGE-2
[10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A8 Insecure Storage
[11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A8 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A7 Insecure Cryptographic Storage
[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A6 Sensitive Data Exposure
[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A3 Sensitive Data Exposure
[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A05 Security Misconfiguration
[16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.3.1.3, Requirement 6.5.8, Requirement 8.4
[18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.4
[19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[20] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[21] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 3.4, Requirement 6.5.3, Requirement 8.2.1
[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 8.3.1
[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 3.3.2, Requirement 3.3.3, Requirement 3.5.1, Requirement 6.2.4, Requirement 8.3.1
[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.3 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.3 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 3.5 - Sensitive Data Retention, Control Objective 6.3 - Sensitive Data Protection, Control Objective 7 - Use of Cryptography
[28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3230.2 CAT II
[29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3230.2 CAT II
[30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3230.2 CAT II
[31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3230.2 CAT II
[32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3230.2 CAT II
[33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3230.2 CAT II
[34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3230.2 CAT II
[35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-002330 CAT II, APSC-DV-002380 CAT II
[50] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Information Leakage (WASC-13)
[51] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2 Information Leakage
desc.semantic.cpp.heap_inspection_swappable_memory