Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
Collapse of Data into Unsafe Value
This vulnerability occurs when an application's data filtering or transformation process incorrectly merges or simplifies information, producing a result that violates security rules. Essentially,…
What is CWE-182?
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-182
-
"/.////" in pathname collapses to absolute path.
-
"/.//..//////././" is collapsed into "/.././" after ".." and "//" sequences are removed.
-
".../...//" collapsed to "..." due to removal of "./" in web server.
-
chain: HTTP server protects against ".." but allows "." variants such as "////./../.../". If the server removes "/.." sequences, the result would collapse into an unsafe value "////../" (CWE-182).
-
MFV. Regular expression intended to protect against directory traversal reduces ".../...//" to "../".
-
XSS protection mechanism strips a sequence that is nested in another sequence.
Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt
- 1
Identifiziere einen Codepfad, der nicht vertrauenswürdige Eingaben ohne Validierung verarbeitet.
- 2
Erzeuge eine Payload, die das unsichere Verhalten auslöst — Injection, Traversal, Overflow oder Logik-Missbrauch.
- 3
Liefere die Payload über einen normalen Request aus und beobachte die Reaktion der Anwendung.
- 4
Iteriere, bis die Antwort Daten preisgibt, Angreifer-Code ausführt oder Berechtigungen eskaliert.
Vulnerable pseudo
MITRE hat kein Codebeispiel für diese CWE veröffentlicht. Das untenstehende Muster ist illustrativ — kanonische Referenzen findest du unter Ressourcen.
// Example pattern — see MITRE for the canonical references.
function handleRequest(input) {
// Untrusted input flows directly into the sensitive sink.
return executeUnsafe(input);
} Secure pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
return executeWithGuards(safe);
} How to prevent CWE-182
- Architecture and Design Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
- 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 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.
- Canonicalize the name to match that of the file system's representation of the name. This can sometimes be achieved with an available API (e.g. in Win32 the GetFullPathName function).
How to detect CWE-182
Plexicus erkennt CWE-182 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.
Frequently asked questions
Was ist CWE-182?
This vulnerability occurs when an application's data filtering or transformation process incorrectly merges or simplifies information, producing a result that violates security rules. Essentially, safe input gets collapsed into a dangerous value.
Wie gravierend ist CWE-182?
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-182 betroffen?
MITRE hat für diese CWE keine betroffenen Plattformen spezifiziert — sie kann in den meisten Anwendungs-Stacks auftreten.
Wie kann ich CWE-182 verhindern?
Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names. 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…
Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-182?
Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-182 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-182?
MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/182.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.
Weaknesses related to CWE-182
Improper Neutralization
This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly validate or sanitize structured data before it's received from an external…
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…
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…
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…
Improper Null Termination
This weakness occurs when software fails to properly end a string or array with the required null character or equivalent terminator.
Encoding Error
This vulnerability occurs when software incorrectly transforms data between different formats, leading to corrupted or misinterpreted…
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…
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,…
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…
Further reading
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.