Description
The software decodes the same input twice, which can limit the effectiveness of any protection mechanism that occurs in between the decoding operations.
Modes of Introduction:
– Implementation
Related Weaknesses
Consequences
Access Control, Confidentiality, Availability, Integrity, Other: Bypass Protection Mechanism, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Varies by Context
Potential Mitigations
Phase: Architecture and Design
Description:
Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
Phase: Implementation
Description:
Phase: Implementation
Description:
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.
Phase: Implementation
Description:
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.
CVE References
- 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.
More Stories
The Most Dangerous Vulnerabilities in Apache Tomcat and How to Protect Against Them
Apache Tomcat is an open-source web server and servlet container that is widely used in enterprise environments to run Java...
ZDI-CAN-18333: A Critical Zero-Day Vulnerability in Microsoft Windows
Zero-day vulnerabilities are a serious threat to cybersecurity, as they can be exploited by malicious actors to gain unauthorized access...
CWE-669 – Incorrect Resource Transfer Between Spheres
Description The product does not properly transfer a resource/behavior to another sphere, or improperly imports a resource/behavior from another sphere,...
CWE-67 – Improper Handling of Windows Device Names
Description The software constructs pathnames from user input, but it does not handle or incorrectly handles a pathname containing a...
CWE-670 – Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation
Description The code contains a control flow path that does not reflect the algorithm that the path is intended to...
CWE-671 – Lack of Administrator Control over Security
Description The product uses security features in a way that prevents the product's administrator from tailoring security settings to reflect...