CWE-174 Variante Brouillon

Double Decoding of the Same Data

This vulnerability occurs when an application decodes the same piece of data twice in sequence. This double processing can bypass or neutralize security checks that happen after the first decode,…

Définition

What is CWE-174?

This vulnerability occurs when an application decodes the same piece of data twice in sequence. This double processing can bypass or neutralize security checks that happen after the first decode, leaving the system exposed.
Double decoding is dangerous because it breaks the expected data flow. Security mechanisms like input validation, sanitization, or intrusion detection are often placed after an initial decoding step, assuming the data is now in its canonical form. When a second, unexpected decode happens, it can transform the data again, rendering those intermediate protections useless and allowing malicious payloads to slip through. Developers can prevent this by establishing a strict, one-time decoding policy in a centralized location within the application's data pipeline. All incoming data should be decoded, validated, and sanitized once into a trusted, internal format before being passed to other components. This ensures security controls are applied to the final, operational form of the data and cannot be circumvented by further transformations.
Impact réel

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-174

  • CVE-2004-1315

    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.

  • CVE-2004-1939

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

  • CVE-2001-0333

    Directory traversal using double encoding.

  • CVE-2004-1938

    "%2527" (double-encoded single quote) used in SQL injection.

  • CVE-2005-1945

    Double hex-encoded data.

  • CVE-2005-0054

    Browser executes HTML at higher privileges via URL with hostnames that are double hex encoded, which are decoded twice to generate a malicious hostname.

Comment les attaquants l'exploitent

Parcours de l'attaquant étape par étape

  1. 1

    Identifier un chemin de code qui traite des entrées non fiables sans validation.

  2. 2

    Élaborer une charge utile qui exploite le comportement non sécurisé — injection, traversal, débordement ou abus de logique.

  3. 3

    Délivrer la charge utile via une requête normale et observer la réaction de l'application.

  4. 4

    Itérer jusqu'à ce que la réponse divulgue des données, exécute le code de l'attaquant ou élève les privilèges.

Exemple de code vulnérable

Vulnerable pseudo

MITRE n'a pas publié d'exemple de code pour ce CWE. Le motif ci-dessous est illustratif — voir Ressources pour les références canoniques.

Vulnérable pseudo 
// Example pattern — see MITRE for the canonical references.
function handleRequest(input) {
  // Untrusted input flows directly into the sensitive sink.
  return executeUnsafe(input);
}
Exemple de code sécurisé

Secure pseudo

Sécurisé 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.
Liste de contrôle de prévention

How to prevent CWE-174

  • 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 Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
  • 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.
Signaux de détection

How to detect CWE-174

SAST High

Exécuter une analyse statique (SAST) sur le code source à la recherche du motif non sécurisé dans le flux de données.

DAST Moderate

Exécuter des tests de sécurité applicative dynamique (DAST) contre le point de terminaison en ligne.

Runtime Moderate

Surveiller les journaux runtime pour détecter des traces d'exception inhabituelles, des entrées malformées ou des tentatives de contournement d'autorisation.

Code review Moderate

Revue de code : signaler tout nouveau code qui traite les entrées de cette surface sans utiliser les helpers du framework validés.

Correction automatique Plexicus

Plexicus détecte automatiquement CWE-174 et ouvre une PR de correction en moins de 60 secondes.

Codex Remedium analyse chaque commit, identifie cette faiblesse précise et livre une pull request prête à être relue avec le correctif. Pas de tickets. Pas de transferts.

Obtenir une démo Essayer Plexicus gratuitement
Questions fréquentes

Frequently asked questions

Qu'est-ce que CWE-174 ?

This vulnerability occurs when an application decodes the same piece of data twice in sequence. This double processing can bypass or neutralize security checks that happen after the first decode, leaving the system exposed.

Quelle est la gravité de CWE-174 ?

MITRE n'a pas publié de note de probabilité d'exploitation pour cette faiblesse. Traitez-la comme un impact moyen jusqu'à ce que votre modèle de menace prouve le contraire.

Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-174 ?

MITRE n'a pas spécifié les plateformes affectées pour ce CWE — il peut s'appliquer à la plupart des stacks applicatives.

Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-174 ?

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…

Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-174 ?

Le moteur SAST de Plexicus reconnaît la signature de flux de données de CWE-174 à chaque commit. Lorsqu'une correspondance est trouvée, notre agent Codex Remedium ouvre une PR de correction avec le code corrigé, les tests et un résumé d'une ligne pour le relecteur.

Où puis-je en savoir plus sur CWE-174 ?

MITRE publie la définition canonique à https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/174.html. Vous pouvez également consulter la documentation OWASP et NIST pour des conseils adjacents.

Faiblesses associées

Weaknesses related to CWE-174

CWE-675 Parent

Multiple Operations on Resource in Single-Operation Context

This vulnerability occurs when a software component performs the same action on a resource multiple times, even though the action is…

CWE-1341 Frère

Multiple Releases of Same Resource or Handle

This vulnerability occurs when a program incorrectly tries to close or release the same system resource—like memory, a file, or a network…

CWE-605 Frère

Multiple Binds to the Same Port

This vulnerability occurs when a system's socket configuration allows multiple applications to bind to the same network port…

CWE-764 Frère

Multiple Locks of a Critical Resource

This vulnerability occurs when a critical resource, such as a file, data structure, or connection, is locked more times than the software…

CWE-765 Frère

Multiple Unlocks of a Critical Resource

This vulnerability occurs when a critical resource, like a lock or semaphore, is unlocked more times than it was locked, putting the…

Ressources

Further reading

Prêt quand vous l'êtes

Arrêtez de payer par développeur.
Commencez à fermer la boucle.

Plexicus est l'ASPM natif IA qui scanne, filtre, corrige, penteste et explique — de façon autonome. Développeurs illimités, dépôts illimités, actions IA à usage équitable. Vrai niveau gratuit, €269/mo annuel quand vous êtes prêt.

Commencer gratuitement Réserver une démo