CWE-799 Clase Incompleto

Improper Control of Interaction Frequency

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly restrict how often or how many times a user or automated system can interact with it.

Definición

What is CWE-799?

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly restrict how often or how many times a user or automated system can interact with it.
Without proper frequency limits, both human users and automated bots can perform actions far more often than intended. This flaw is commonly exploited to launch denial-of-service (DoS) attacks, bypass business logic (like voting systems or promotional offers), or brute-force credentials by making unlimited password attempts. Developers must implement controls like rate limiting, request throttling, and CAPTCHAs to enforce interaction boundaries. These measures are essential for protecting system availability, ensuring fair use, and preventing automated tools from exploiting core application functions.
Impacto en el mundo real

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-799

  • CVE-2002-1876

    Mail server allows attackers to prevent other users from accessing mail by sending large number of rapid requests.

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 C

In the following code a username and password is read from a socket and an attempt is made to authenticate the username and password. The code will continuously checked the socket for a username and password until it has been authenticated.

Vulnerable C 
char username[USERNAME_SIZE];
  char password[PASSWORD_SIZE];
  while (isValidUser == 0) {
  		if (getNextMessage(socket, username, USERNAME_SIZE) > 0) {
  			if (getNextMessage(socket, password, PASSWORD_SIZE) > 0) {
  				isValidUser = AuthenticateUser(username, password);
  			}
  		}
  }
  return(SUCCESS);
Ejemplo de código seguro

Secure C

This code does not place any restriction on the number of authentication attempts made. There should be a limit on the number of authentication attempts made to prevent brute force attacks as in the following example code.

Seguro C 
int count = 0;
  while ((isValidUser == 0) && (count < MAX_ATTEMPTS)) {
  		if (getNextMessage(socket, username, USERNAME_SIZE) > 0) {
  			if (getNextMessage(socket, password, PASSWORD_SIZE) > 0) {
  				isValidUser = AuthenticateUser(username, password);
  			}
  		}
  		count++;
  }
  if (isValidUser) {
  	return(SUCCESS);
  }
  else {
  	return(FAIL);
  }
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-799

  • Architecture Use safe-by-default frameworks and APIs that prevent the unsafe pattern from being expressible.
  • Implementation Validate input at trust boundaries; use allowlists, not denylists.
  • Implementation Apply the principle of least privilege to credentials, file paths, and runtime permissions.
  • Testing Cover this weakness in CI: SAST rules + targeted unit tests for the data flow.
  • Operation Monitor logs for the runtime signals listed in the next section.
Señales de detección

How to detect CWE-799

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-799 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.

Solicitar demo Probar Plexicus gratis
Preguntas frecuentes

Frequently asked questions

¿Qué es CWE-799?

This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly restrict how often or how many times a user or automated system can interact with it.

¿Qué gravedad tiene CWE-799?

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-799?

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

¿Cómo puedo prevenir CWE-799?

Use safe-by-default frameworks, validate untrusted input at trust boundaries, and apply the principle of least privilege. Cover the data-flow signature in CI with SAST.

¿Cómo detecta y corrige Plexicus CWE-799?

El motor SAST de Plexicus detecta la firma de flujo de datos para CWE-799 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-799?

MITRE publica la definición canónica en https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/799.html. También puedes consultar la documentación de OWASP y NIST para guías relacionadas.

Debilidades relacionadas

Weaknesses related to CWE-799

CWE-691 Padre

Insufficient Control Flow Management

This vulnerability occurs when a program's execution flow isn't properly managed, allowing attackers to bypass critical checks, trigger…

CWE-1265 Hermano

Unintended Reentrant Invocation of Non-reentrant Code Via Nested Calls

This vulnerability occurs when a non-reentrant function is called, and during its execution, another call is triggered that unexpectedly…

CWE-1281 Hermano

Sequence of Processor Instructions Leads to Unexpected Behavior

Certain sequences of valid and invalid processor instructions can cause the CPU to lock up or behave unpredictably, often requiring a hard…

CWE-362 Hermano

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

A race condition occurs when multiple processes or threads access a shared resource simultaneously without proper coordination, creating a…

CWE-430 Hermano

Deployment of Wrong Handler

This vulnerability occurs when a system incorrectly assigns or routes an object to the wrong processing component.

CWE-431 Hermano

Missing Handler

This vulnerability occurs when a software component lacks the necessary code to properly handle an error or unexpected event.

CWE-662 Hermano

Improper Synchronization

This vulnerability occurs when a multi-threaded or multi-process application allows shared resources to be accessed by multiple threads or…

CWE-670 Hermano

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-696 Hermano

Incorrect Behavior Order

This weakness occurs when a system executes multiple dependent actions in the wrong sequence, leading to unexpected and potentially…

Recursos

Further reading

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.

Comenzar gratis Reservar una demo