Incomplete Comparison with Missing Factors

Incomplete Class
Structure: Simple
Description

This weakness occurs when a program compares two items but fails to check all the necessary attributes that define their true relationship. The incomplete check can cause the software to treat different items as identical or make incorrect security decisions.

Extended Description

Incomplete comparisons happen when a developer writes a check that only validates a subset of an object's or user's identity. For example, a system might authenticate a user by checking only a username without verifying the associated password or session token, or it might compare data objects using only an ID field while ignoring a critical 'type' or 'state' field. This creates a logical gap where two distinct entities can be incorrectly evaluated as equivalent. This flaw directly undermines security and logic by allowing unauthorized access, privilege escalation, or data corruption. Attackers can exploit it by providing an entity that matches on the checked factors but differs maliciously on the unchecked ones. To prevent this, always ensure comparison functions validate every unique and security-relevant property that defines an entity's complete identity within that specific context.

Common Consequences 1
Scope: IntegrityAccess Control

Impact: Alter Execution LogicBypass Protection Mechanism

Potential Mitigations 1
Phase: Testing
Thoroughly test the comparison scheme before deploying code into production. Perform positive testing as well as negative testing.
Demonstrative Examples 2

ID : DX-115

Consider an application in which Truck objects are defined to be the same if they have the same make, the same model, and were manufactured in the same year.

Code Example:

Bad
Java
java
Here, the equals() method only checks the make and model of the Truck objects, but the year of manufacture is not included.

ID : DX-116

This example defines a fixed username and password. The AuthenticateUser() function is intended to accept a username and a password from an untrusted user, and check to ensure that it matches the username and password. If the username and password match, AuthenticateUser() is intended to indicate that authentication succeeded.

Code Example:

Bad
C

/* Ignore CWE-259 (hard-coded password) and CWE-309 (use of password system for authentication) for this example. /

c
In AuthenticateUser(), the strncmp() call uses the string length of an attacker-provided inPass parameter in order to determine how many characters to check in the password. So, if the attacker only provides a password of length 1, the check will only examine the first byte of the application's password before determining success.
As a result, this partial comparison leads to improper authentication (Improper Authentication).
Any of these passwords would still cause authentication to succeed for the "admin" user:

Code Example:

Attack
bash
This significantly reduces the search space for an attacker, making brute force attacks more feasible.
The same problem also applies to the username, so values such as "a" and "adm" will succeed for the username.
While this demonstrative example may not seem realistic, see the Observed Examples for CVE entries that effectively reflect this same weakness.
Observed Examples 2
CVE-2005-2782PHP remote file inclusion in web application that filters "http" and "https" URLs, but not "ftp".
CVE-2014-6394Product does not prevent access to restricted directories due to partial string comparison with a public directory
Applicable Platforms
Languages:
Not Language-Specific : Undetermined
Modes of Introduction
Implementation
Related Weaknesses