CWE-555 Variant Draft

J2EE Misconfiguration: Plaintext Password in Configuration File

A J2EE application insecurely stores an unprotected password within a configuration file.

Definition

What is CWE-555?

A J2EE application insecurely stores an unprotected password within a configuration file.
This misconfiguration occurs when a developer writes a password directly into a configuration file (like XML or .properties) without any encryption. Since these files are often needed for the application to start, they are frequently readable by other processes or users on the system, exposing the credential in clear text. Anyone with access to this file, such as a system administrator, a different application on the same server, or an attacker who gains a foothold, can immediately read and use the password. This bypasses all security controls for the protected resource, such as a database, making it a trivial target for compromise.
Real-world impact

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-555

No public CVE references are linked to this CWE in MITRE's catalog yet.

How attackers exploit it

Step-by-step attacker path

  1. 1

    Identify a code path that handles untrusted input without validation.

  2. 2

    Craft a payload that exercises the unsafe behavior — injection, traversal, overflow, or logic abuse.

  3. 3

    Deliver the payload through a normal request and observe the application's reaction.

  4. 4

    Iterate until the response leaks data, executes attacker code, or escalates privileges.

Vulnerable code example

Vulnerable Java

Below is a snippet from a Java properties file in which the LDAP server password is stored in plaintext.

Vulnerable Java
webapp.ldap.username=secretUsername
  webapp.ldap.password=secretPassword
Secure code example

Secure pseudo

Secure pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
  const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
  return executeWithGuards(safe);
}
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Prevention checklist

How to prevent CWE-555

  • Architecture and Design Do not hardwire passwords into your software.
  • Architecture and Design Use industry standard libraries to encrypt passwords before storage in configuration files.
Detection signals

How to detect CWE-555

SAST High

Run static analysis (SAST) on the codebase looking for the unsafe pattern in the data flow.

DAST Moderate

Run dynamic application security testing against the live endpoint.

Runtime Moderate

Watch runtime logs for unusual exception traces, malformed input, or authorization bypass attempts.

Code review Moderate

Code review: flag any new code that handles input from this surface without using the validated framework helpers.

CWE-555

Don't catalog this weakness. Prove it's reachable.

Plexicus turns CWE catalogs into evidence: every CWE-pattern is matched against your real code graph, reach is proven on a sandbox clone, and verified findings ship as reviewed PRs.

Frequently asked questions

Frequently asked questions

What is CWE-555?

A J2EE application insecurely stores an unprotected password within a configuration file.

How serious is CWE-555?

MITRE has not published a likelihood-of-exploit rating for this weakness. Treat it as medium-impact until your threat model proves otherwise.

What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-555?

MITRE has not specified affected platforms for this CWE — it can apply across most application stacks.

How can I prevent CWE-555?

Do not hardwire passwords into your software. Use industry standard libraries to encrypt passwords before storage in configuration files.

How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-555?

Plexicus's SAST engine matches the data-flow signature for CWE-555 on every commit. When a match is found, our Codex Remedium agent opens a fix PR with the corrected code, tests, and a one-line summary for the reviewer.

Where can I learn more about CWE-555?

MITRE publishes the canonical definition at https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/555.html. You can also reference OWASP and NIST documentation for adjacent guidance.

Ready to validate what matters?

Ready to validate what matters?

Plexicus is Proof-Driven AppSec: validated findings, contextual understanding, and reviewed remediation — anchored in evidence, scoped with you.

Qualification

Check whether AI Swarm Pentest fits your environment.

Share the minimum context. We will review the scope and tell you the next commercial step.

Before submitting — verify you fit

Teams with fewer than 50 developers: start a 14-day Trial instead of booking a demo. Start a 14-day Trial →

0 / 280

No commitment. If you don't fit, we'll tell you.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorised target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)