CWE-172 Clase Borrador

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.

Definición

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.
Impacto en el mundo real

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-172

  • 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.

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

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

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

Cómo lo explotan los atacantes

Ruta del atacante paso a paso

  1. 1

    Identifica una ruta de código que maneje entrada no confiable sin validación.

  2. 2

    Crea un payload que ejercite el comportamiento inseguro — inyección, traversal, overflow o abuso de lógica.

  3. 3

    Envía el payload a través de una solicitud normal y observa la reacción de la aplicación.

  4. 4

    Itera hasta que la respuesta filtre datos, ejecute código del atacante o escale privilegios.

Ejemplo de código vulnerable

Vulnerable pseudo

MITRE no ha publicado un ejemplo de código para esta CWE. El patrón siguiente es ilustrativo — consulta Recursos para referencias canónicas.

Vulnerable pseudo
// Example pattern — see MITRE for the canonical references.
function handleRequest(input) {
  // Untrusted input flows directly into the sensitive sink.
  return executeUnsafe(input);
}
Ejemplo de código seguro

Secure pseudo

Seguro 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.
Lista de prevención

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.
Señales de detección

How to detect CWE-172

SAST High

Ejecuta análisis estático (SAST) sobre el código buscando el patrón inseguro en el flujo de datos.

DAST Moderate

Ejecuta pruebas dinámicas de seguridad de aplicaciones (DAST) contra el endpoint en vivo.

Runtime Moderate

Vigila los logs en tiempo de ejecución para detectar trazas de excepción inusuales, entradas malformadas o intentos de bypass de autorización.

Code review Moderate

Revisión de código: marca cualquier código nuevo que maneje entrada desde esta superficie sin usar los helpers validados del framework.

Auto-corrección de Plexicus

Plexicus detecta automáticamente CWE-172 y abre un PR de corrección en menos de 60 segundos.

Codex Remedium escanea cada commit, identifica esta debilidad concreta y entrega un pull request listo para revisión con el parche. Sin tickets. Sin traspasos.

Preguntas frecuentes

Frequently asked questions

¿Qué es 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.

¿Qué gravedad tiene CWE-172?

MITRE no ha publicado una calificación de probabilidad de explotación para esta debilidad. Trátala como de impacto medio hasta que tu modelo de amenazas demuestre lo contrario.

¿Qué lenguajes o plataformas se ven afectados por CWE-172?

MITRE no ha especificado plataformas afectadas para esta CWE — puede aplicar a la mayoría de los stacks de aplicaciones.

¿Cómo puedo prevenir CWE-172?

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…

¿Cómo detecta y corrige Plexicus CWE-172?

El motor SAST de Plexicus detecta la firma de flujo de datos para CWE-172 en cada commit. Cuando hay coincidencia, nuestro agente Codex Remedium abre un PR de corrección con el código corregido, las pruebas y un resumen de una línea para el revisor.

¿Dónde puedo aprender más sobre CWE-172?

MITRE publica la definición canónica en https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/172.html. También puedes consultar la documentación de OWASP y NIST para guías relacionadas.

Debilidades relacionadas

Weaknesses related to CWE-172

CWE-707 Padre

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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 Hermano

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…

Listo cuando tú lo estés

Deja de pagar por desarrollador.
Empieza a cerrar el bucle.

Plexicus es el ASPM nativo de IA que escanea, filtra, corrige, pentestea y explica — de forma autónoma. Desarrolladores ilimitados, repos ilimitados, acciones de IA de uso justo. Nivel gratuito real, €269/mo anual cuando estés listo.