Ejecuta análisis estático (SAST) sobre el código buscando el patrón inseguro en el flujo de datos.
Path Traversal: '/absolute/pathname/here'
This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts user input containing absolute file paths (starting with a forward slash like '/etc/passwd') and uses it to access files without proper security…
What is CWE-37?
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-37
-
Multiple FTP clients write arbitrary files via absolute paths in server responses
-
ZIP file extractor allows full path
-
Path traversal using absolute pathname
-
Path traversal using absolute pathname
-
Path traversal using absolute pathname
-
Arbitrary files may be overwritten via compressed attachments that specify absolute path names for the decompressed output.
Ruta del atacante paso a paso
- 1
Identifica una ruta de código que maneje entrada no confiable sin validación.
- 2
Crea un payload que ejercite el comportamiento inseguro — inyección, traversal, overflow o abuso de lógica.
- 3
Envía el payload a través de una solicitud normal y observa la reacción de la aplicación.
- 4
Itera hasta que la respuesta filtre datos, ejecute código del atacante o escale privilegios.
Vulnerable pseudo
MITRE no ha publicado un ejemplo de código para esta CWE. El patrón siguiente es ilustrativo — consulta Recursos para referencias canónicas.
// 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-37
- 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. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the "../" string.
- 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.
How to detect CWE-37
Ejecuta pruebas dinámicas de seguridad de aplicaciones (DAST) contra el endpoint en vivo.
Vigila los logs en tiempo de ejecución para detectar trazas de excepción inusuales, entradas malformadas o intentos de bypass de autorización.
Revisión de código: marca cualquier código nuevo que maneje entrada desde esta superficie sin usar los helpers validados del framework.
Plexicus detecta automáticamente CWE-37 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.
Frequently asked questions
¿Qué es CWE-37?
This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts user input containing absolute file paths (starting with a forward slash like '/etc/passwd') and uses it to access files without proper security checks. Attackers can exploit this to read, write, or delete sensitive files anywhere on the server's filesystem.
¿Qué gravedad tiene CWE-37?
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-37?
MITRE no ha especificado plataformas afectadas para esta CWE — puede aplicar a la mayoría de los stacks de aplicaciones.
¿Cómo puedo prevenir CWE-37?
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-37?
El motor SAST de Plexicus detecta la firma de flujo de datos para CWE-37 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-37?
MITRE publica la definición canónica en https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/37.html. También puedes consultar la documentación de OWASP y NIST para guías relacionadas.
Weaknesses related to CWE-37
Absolute Path Traversal
This vulnerability occurs when an application builds file paths using user input without properly blocking absolute paths like…
Path Traversal: '\absolute\pathname\here'
This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts user-supplied input containing Windows-style absolute paths (like…
Path Traversal: 'C:dirname'
This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts user input containing Windows drive letters (like 'C:dirname') without proper…
Path Traversal: '\\UNC\share\name\' (Windows UNC Share)
This vulnerability occurs when an application accepts user input containing a Windows UNC share path (like '\\UNC\share\name') without…
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.