CWE-143 Variant Draft

Improper Neutralization of Record Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape special characters that function as record separators in data streams. When untrusted input containing these…

Definition

What is CWE-143?

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape special characters that function as record separators in data streams. When untrusted input containing these delimiters is passed to a downstream system, it can corrupt data structures, cause misinterpretation of records, or trigger unauthorized actions.
Imagine your application accepts user input—like a form field for a name or address—and later packages that data into a structured format like a CSV file, a log entry, or a protocol message. If an attacker submits input containing a record delimiter (such as a newline, pipe character, or custom separator), and your code doesn't neutralize it, that input can break the expected record boundaries. The downstream parser, whether it's a database, a reporting tool, or another service, will then misinterpret where one record ends and the next begins, leading to data corruption, injection of false records, or logic errors. In practice, this flaw allows data to escape its intended context. For example, a single input field could be parsed as multiple separate records, or critical delimiters could be missing, causing entire records to be merged or skipped. To prevent this, you must always validate and sanitize input by escaping or removing delimiter characters based on the specific data format and context before processing or transmitting the data.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-143

  • CVE-2004-1982

    Carriage returns in subject field allow adding new records to data file.

  • CVE-2001-0527

    Attacker inserts carriage returns and "|" field separator characters to add new user/privileges.

Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

  1. 1

    Identifiziere einen Codepfad, der nicht vertrauenswürdige Eingaben ohne Validierung verarbeitet.

  2. 2

    Erzeuge eine Payload, die das unsichere Verhalten auslöst — Injection, Traversal, Overflow oder Logik-Missbrauch.

  3. 3

    Liefere die Payload über einen normalen Request aus und beobachte die Reaktion der Anwendung.

  4. 4

    Iteriere, bis die Antwort Daten preisgibt, Angreifer-Code ausführt oder Berechtigungen eskaliert.

Verwundbares Codebeispiel

Vulnerable pseudo

MITRE hat kein Codebeispiel für diese CWE veröffentlicht. Das untenstehende Muster ist illustrativ — kanonische Referenzen findest du unter Ressourcen.

Verwundbar pseudo 
// Example pattern — see MITRE for the canonical references.
function handleRequest(input) {
  // Untrusted input flows directly into the sensitive sink.
  return executeUnsafe(input);
}
Sicheres Codebeispiel

Secure pseudo

Sicher 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.
Präventions-Checkliste

How to prevent CWE-143

  • Developers should anticipate that record delimiters will be injected/removed/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
  • Implementation Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • Implementation While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88).
  • Implementation Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.
Erkennungssignale

How to detect CWE-143

SAST High

Führe statische Analyse (SAST) auf der Codebasis aus und suche im Datenfluss nach dem unsicheren Muster.

DAST Moderate

Führe dynamische Application-Security-Tests gegen den Live-Endpoint aus.

Runtime Moderate

Beobachte Runtime-Logs auf ungewöhnliche Exception-Traces, fehlerhafte Eingaben oder Versuche, Autorisierung zu umgehen.

Code review Moderate

Code Review: Markiere jeden neuen Code, der Eingaben von dieser Oberfläche ohne validierte Framework-Helper verarbeitet.

Plexicus Auto-Fix

Plexicus erkennt CWE-143 automatisch und öffnet in unter 60 Sekunden einen Fix-PR.

Codex Remedium scannt jeden Commit, identifiziert genau diese Schwachstelle und liefert einen reviewer-ready Pull Request mit dem Patch. Keine Tickets. Keine Hand-offs.

Demo anfordern Plexicus kostenlos testen
Häufig gestellte Fragen

Frequently asked questions

Was ist CWE-143?

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape special characters that function as record separators in data streams. When untrusted input containing these delimiters is passed to a downstream system, it can corrupt data structures, cause misinterpretation of records, or trigger unauthorized actions.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-143?

MITRE hat für diese Schwachstelle keine Exploit-Wahrscheinlichkeit veröffentlicht. Behandle sie als mittlere Auswirkung, bis dein Threat Model anderes belegt.

Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-143 betroffen?

MITRE hat für diese CWE keine betroffenen Plattformen spezifiziert — sie kann in den meisten Anwendungs-Stacks auftreten.

Wie kann ich CWE-143 verhindern?

Developers should anticipate that record delimiters will be injected/removed/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system. Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications,…

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-143?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-143 bei jedem Commit. Bei einem Treffer öffnet unser Codex-Remedium-Agent einen Fix-PR mit korrigiertem Code, Tests und einer einzeiligen Zusammenfassung für den Reviewer.

Wo erfahre ich mehr über CWE-143?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/143.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Verwandte Schwachstellen

Weaknesses related to CWE-143

CWE-140 Parent

Improper Neutralization of Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly handle or sanitize delimiter characters within data inputs, allowing them…

CWE-141 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Parameter/Argument Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize special characters that act as delimiters in data being passed…

CWE-142 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Value Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape special characters that act as data separators…

CWE-144 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape line break characters (like newline or carriage return)…

CWE-145 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Section Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or validate special characters that act as section delimiters in…

CWE-146 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Expression/Command Delimiters

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize input that contains special characters used as delimiters in…

Ressourcen

Further reading

Bereit, wenn du es bist

Schluss mit dem Bezahlen pro Entwickler.
Schließ den Kreislauf.

Plexicus ist die KI-native ASPM, die scannt, filtert, fixt, pentestet und erklärt — autonom. Unbegrenzte Entwickler, unbegrenzte Repos, Fair-Use-KI-Aktionen. Echter kostenloser Tarif, €269/mo jährlich, wenn du bereit bist.

Kostenlos starten Demo buchen