CWE-483 Base Draft Low likelihood

Incorrect Block Delimitation

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.

Definition

What is CWE-483?

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.
In programming languages like JavaScript, Python, or Go, braces, indentation, or keywords are sometimes optional for single-statement blocks. However, when you intend for multiple statements to execute together—such as within an `if` condition or a loop—omitting the explicit block delimiter means only the first statement is controlled by that condition. Subsequent statements execute unconditionally, creating a critical logic error. This error often manifests as a subtle bug where security-critical operations, like privilege checks or input validation, are bypassed. For example, an access control check might only guard a logging statement while allowing the actual data transaction to proceed without authorization. Always use explicit delimiters for multi-statement blocks to ensure your code's logic and security controls behave as intended.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-483

  • CVE-2014-1266

    incorrect indentation of "goto" statement makes it more difficult to detect an incorrect goto (Apple's "goto fail")

Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

  1. 1

    In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

  2. 2

    This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.

  3. 3

    In this example, the programmer has indented the Do_Y() statement as if the intention is that the function should be associated with the preceding conditional and should only be called when the condition is true. However, because Do_X() was called on the same line as the conditional and there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

  4. 4

    This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.

Verwundbares Codebeispiel

Vulnerable C

In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

Verwundbar C 
if (condition==true)
  	Do_X();
  	Do_Y();
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-483

  • Implementation Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.
Erkennungssignale

How to detect CWE-483

Automated Static Analysis High

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.)

Plexicus Auto-Fix

Plexicus erkennt CWE-483 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-483?

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-483?

MITRE stuft die Exploit-Wahrscheinlichkeit als niedrig ein — eine Ausnutzung ist selten, die Schwachstelle sollte aber dennoch behoben werden, sobald sie entdeckt wird.

Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-483 betroffen?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: C, C++.

Wie kann ich CWE-483 verhindern?

Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-483?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-483 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-483?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/483.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Verwandte Schwachstellen

Weaknesses related to CWE-483

CWE-670 Parent

Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation

This weakness occurs when a section of code is structured in a way that always executes incorrectly, regardless of input or conditions.…

CWE-480 Sibling

Use of Incorrect Operator

This vulnerability occurs when a developer mistakenly uses the wrong operator in their code, leading to unintended and potentially…

CWE-484 Sibling

Omitted Break Statement in Switch

This vulnerability occurs when a developer forgets to include a 'break' statement inside a switch-case block. Without it, the code…

CWE-617 Sibling

Reachable Assertion

A reachable assertion occurs when an attacker can trigger an assert() statement or similar debugging check, causing the application to…

CWE-698 Sibling

Execution After Redirect (EAR)

Execution After Redirect (EAR) occurs when a web application sends a redirect response to a user's browser but continues to run…

CWE-783 Sibling

Operator Precedence Logic Error

This vulnerability occurs when a developer writes a conditional expression where the intended logic is broken due to misunderstanding or…

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