界: Input Validation and Representation

輸入驗證和表示法問題是由中繼字元、替代編碼和數值表示法引起的。信任輸入會導致安全問題。問題包括：「Buffer Overflows」、「Cross-Site Scripting」攻擊、「SQL Injection」及其他許多問題。

Dynamic Code Evaluation: Script Injection

Abstract

在執行期間轉譯使用者所控制的指示，可讓攻擊者執行惡意程式碼。

Explanation

許多現代的程式語言均允許動態轉譯來源指示。此功能可讓程式設計師根據使用者的輸入執行動態指示。程式碼插入弱點會在程式設計師錯誤地假設下列情況時發生：直接由使用者所提供的指示僅會執行無害的作業，例如對使用中的使用者物件進行簡單的計算或修改使用者的狀態。但是，若沒有適當的驗證，使用者可能會指定不是程式設計師想要執行的作業。

範例 1：在這個程式碼的插入範例中，要求參數會繫結到受評估的 razor 範本中。


...
	string name = Request["username"];
	string template = "Hello @Model.Name! Welcome " + name + "!";
	string result = Razor.Parse(template, new { Name = "World" });
...

operation 是良性的值時 (例如「John」)，程式會正常運作；在此案例中，result 變數指定的值是「Hello World!Welcome John!」。不過，如果攻擊者指定同時為有效且惡意的語言作業，則會使用父系程序的完整權限來執行那些作業。當主要語言提供系統資源的存取權限或允許執行系統指令時，這類攻擊會更加危險。舉例來說，Razor 允許呼叫 C# 物件，如果攻擊者指定「@{ System.Diagnostics.Process proc = new System.Diagnostics.Process(); proc.EnableRaisingEvents=false; proc.StartInfo.FileName=\"calc\"; proc.Start(); }」做為 name 的值，則會在主機系統上執行系統指令。

References

[1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 95, CWE ID 494

[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094

[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094

[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094

[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094

[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094

[7] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754

[8] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI

[9] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data

[10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)

[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation

[12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)

[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection

[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation

[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4

[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws

[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution

[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection

[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection

[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection

[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection

[22] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6

[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3

[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1

[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4

[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4

[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection

[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation

[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation

[34] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 116, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094

[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 494

[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 494

[37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[59] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)

desc.dataflow.dotnet.dynamic_code_evaluation_script_injection

Abstract

在執行期間轉譯使用者所控制的指示，可讓攻擊者執行惡意程式碼。

Explanation

許多現代的程式語言均允許動態轉譯來源指示。此功能可讓程式設計師根據使用者的輸入執行動態指示。程式碼插入弱點會在程式設計師錯誤地假設下列情況時發生：直接由使用者所提供的指示僅會執行無害的作業，例如對使用中的使用者物件進行簡單的計算或修改使用者的狀態。但是，若沒有適當的驗證，使用者可能會指定不是程式設計師想要執行的作業。

範例 1：在此典型的程式碼注入範例中，應用程式會實作基本的計算機，讓使用者指定要執行的指令。


...
        ScriptEngineManager scriptEngineManager = new ScriptEngineManager();
        ScriptEngine scriptEngine = scriptEngineManager.getEngineByExtension("js");
        userOps = request.getParameter("operation");
        Object result = scriptEngine.eval(userOps);
...

當 operation 參數是良性值時，例如「8 + 7 * 2」，程式會正常運作。在此情況下，會指定 result 變數的值為 22。不過，如果攻擊者指定有效且惡意的語言作業，則會使用父系程序的完整權限來執行這些作業。當主要語言提供系統資源的存取權限或允許執行系統指令時，這類攻擊會更加危險。例如，JavaScript 允許叫用 Java 物件，如果攻擊者指定「java.lang.Runtime.getRuntime().exec("shutdown -h now")」作為 operation 的值，則會在主機系統上執行關機指令。

References

[1] INJECT-8: Take care interpreting untrusted code Oracle

[2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration CWE ID 95, CWE ID 494

[3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019 [18] CWE ID 094

[4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020 [17] CWE ID 094

[5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022 [25] CWE ID 094

[6] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2023 [23] CWE ID 094

[7] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2024 [11] CWE ID 094

[8] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2 CCI-001764, CCI-001774, CCI-002754

[9] Standards Mapping - FIPS200 SI

[10] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Indirect Access to Sensitive Data

[11] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 CM-7 Least Functionality (P1), SI-10 Information Input Validation (P1)

[12] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5 CM-7 Least Functionality, SI-10 Information Input Validation

[13] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0 1.14.2 Configuration Architectural Requirements (L2 L3), 5.2.4 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.5 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.2.8 Sanitization and Sandboxing Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 5.3.6 Output Encoding and Injection Prevention Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 10.3.2 Deployed Application Integrity Controls (L1 L2 L3), 12.3.3 File Execution Requirements (L1 L2 L3), 14.2.3 Dependency (L1 L2 L3)

[14] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2014 M7 Client Side Injection

[15] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile 2024 M4 Insufficient Input/Output Validation

[16] Standards Mapping - OWASP Mobile Application Security Verification Standard 2.0 MASVS-CODE-4

[17] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004 A6 Injection Flaws

[18] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2007 A3 Malicious File Execution

[19] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2010 A1 Injection

[20] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2013 A1 Injection

[21] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2017 A1 Injection

[22] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2021 A03 Injection

[23] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1 Requirement 6.5.6

[24] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.2 Requirement 6.3.1.1, Requirement 6.5.3

[25] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 2.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[26] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0 Requirement 6.5.1

[27] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[28] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2 Requirement 6.5.1

[29] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1 Requirement 6.5.1

[30] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0 Requirement 6.2.4

[31] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 4.0.1 Requirement 6.2.4

[32] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection

[33] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation

[34] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.2 Control Objective 4.2 - Critical Asset Protection, Control Objective B.3.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective B.3.1.1 - Terminal Software Attack Mitigation, Control Objective C.3.2 - Web Software Attack Mitigation

[35] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2009 Insecure Interaction - CWE ID 116, Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 094

[36] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2010 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 494

[37] Standards Mapping - SANS Top 25 2011 Risky Resource Management - CWE ID 494

[38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[39] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[40] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[41] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[42] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[43] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[44] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10 APP3510 CAT I, APP3570 CAT I

[45] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[46] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[47] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[48] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[49] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[50] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[51] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[52] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[53] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[54] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[55] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[56] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[57] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.2 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[58] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.3 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[59] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 6.1 APSC-DV-001480 CAT II, APSC-DV-001490 CAT II, APSC-DV-002530 CAT II, APSC-DV-002560 CAT I

[60] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00 Improper Input Handling (WASC-20)

desc.dataflow.java.dynamic_code_evaluation_script_injection

Abstract

在執行期間轉譯使用者所控制的指示，可讓攻擊者執行惡意程式碼。

Explanation

許多現代的程式語言均允許動態轉譯來源指示。此功能可讓程式設計師根據使用者的輸入執行動態指示。程式碼插入弱點會在程式設計師錯誤地假設下列情況時發生：直接由使用者所提供的指示僅會執行無害的作業，例如對使用中的使用者物件進行簡單的計算或修改使用者的狀態。但是，若沒有適當的驗證，使用者可能會指定不是程式設計師想要執行的作業。

範例 1：在此典型的程式碼注入範例中，應用程式會實作基本的計算機，讓使用者指定要執行的指令。


...
    userOp = form.operation.value;
    calcResult = eval(userOp);
...

當 operation 參數是良性值時，例如「8 + 7 * 2」，程式會正常運作。在此情況下，會指定 calcResult 變數的值為 22。不過，如果攻擊者指定有效且惡意的語言作業，則會使用父系程序的完整權限來執行這些作業。當主要語言提供系統資源的存取權限或允許執行系統指令時，這類攻擊會更加危險。在 JavaScript 案例中，攻擊者可能使用此弱點執行 Cross-site scripting 攻擊。