CWE-172 Class Draft

Encoding Error

This vulnerability occurs when software incorrectly transforms data between different formats, leading to corrupted or misinterpreted information that can break functionality or create security gaps.

Definition

What is CWE-172?

This vulnerability occurs when software incorrectly transforms data between different formats, leading to corrupted or misinterpreted information that can break functionality or create security gaps.
Encoding errors happen when a system fails to properly convert data from one character set or format to another, such as between UTF-8, ASCII, or URL encoding. This often surfaces when handling user input, transferring data across systems, or preparing information for display. The result is 'mojibake' (garbled text), lost data, or unexpected characters that can crash applications, corrupt data storage, or bypass validation checks. For developers, the core issue is assuming data will always be in a single, expected format. To prevent this, explicitly define and validate character encodings at every system boundary—when reading input, sending output, or storing data. Use standardized, well-tested libraries for all encoding/decoding operations instead of custom logic, and consistently apply these transformations across your entire application stack to maintain data integrity.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-172

  • CVE-2004-1315

    Forum software improperly URL decodes the highlight parameter when extracting text to highlight, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code by double-encoding the highlight value so that special characters are inserted into the result.

  • CVE-2004-1939

    XSS protection mechanism attempts to remove "/" that could be used to close tags, but it can be bypassed using double encoded slashes (%252F)

  • CVE-2001-0709

    Server allows a remote attacker to obtain source code of ASP files via a URL encoded with Unicode.

  • CVE-2005-2256

    Hex-encoded path traversal variants - "%2e%2e", "%2e%2e%2f", "%5c%2e%2e"

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-172

  • 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-172

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-172 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-172?

This vulnerability occurs when software incorrectly transforms data between different formats, leading to corrupted or misinterpreted information that can break functionality or create security gaps.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-172?

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-172 betroffen?

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

Wie kann ich CWE-172 verhindern?

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…

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-172?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-172 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-172?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/172.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Verwandte Schwachstellen

Weaknesses related to CWE-172

CWE-707 Parent

Improper Neutralization

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly validate or sanitize structured data before it's received from an external…

CWE-116 Sibling

Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output

This vulnerability occurs when an application builds a structured message—like a query, command, or request—for another component but…

CWE-138 Sibling

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements

This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts external input but fails to properly sanitize special characters or syntax that have…

CWE-1426 Sibling

Improper Validation of Generative AI Output

This vulnerability occurs when an application uses a generative AI model (like an LLM) but fails to properly check the AI's output before…

CWE-170 Sibling

Improper Null Termination

This weakness occurs when software fails to properly end a string or array with the required null character or equivalent terminator.

CWE-182 Sibling

Collapse of Data into Unsafe Value

This vulnerability occurs when an application's data filtering or transformation process incorrectly merges or simplifies information,…

CWE-20 Sibling

Improper Input Validation

This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts data from an external source but fails to properly verify that the data is safe and…

CWE-228 Sibling

Improper Handling of Syntactically Invalid Structure

This vulnerability occurs when software fails to properly reject or process input that doesn't follow the expected format or structure,…

CWE-240 Sibling

Improper Handling of Inconsistent Structural Elements

This vulnerability occurs when a system fails to properly manage situations where related data structures or elements should match but are…

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