Vulnerability Mapping:ALLOWEDThis CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review
(with careful review of mapping notes)
Abstraction:
ClassClass - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource.
View customized information:
Shows the description and diagram, platforms, mitigations, consequences, relationships, memberships, and content history.For users who are interested in more notional aspects of a weakness. Example: educators, technical writers, and project/program managers.For users who are concerned with the practical application and details about the nature of a weakness and how to prevent it from happening. Example: tool developers, security researchers, pen-testers, incident response analysts.For users who are mapping an issue to CWE/CAPEC IDs, i.e., finding the most appropriate CWE for a specific issue (e.g., a CVE record). Example: tool developers, security researchers.For users who wish to see all available information for the CWE/CAPEC entry.For users who want to customize what details are displayed.
×
Edit Custom Filter
More information is available — Please edit the custom filter or select a different filter.
Description
The product parses or transforms data into another format,
structure, or representation, but the newly-produced data
is not semantically equivalent to the original data.
Common Consequences
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
Impact
Details
Bypass Protection Mechanism; Unexpected State; Varies by Context
Scope: Integrity, Other
The consequences vary depending on how the
transformed data is intended to be used. If the data
influences behavior of the product such as affecting
how a security decision is made, then this could
bypass an intended protection mechanism.
Potential Mitigations
Phase(s)
Mitigation
Architecture and Design; Implementation
Validate the transformed data against what
was expected to be produced. If the data is complex
and free-form with some "special elements" in them,
consider re-parsing the output to ensure that it
matches expectations.
Relationships
This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this
weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to
similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition,
relationships such as PeerOf, Overlaps, and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user
may want to explore.
Relevant to the view "Complete Weakness Hierarchy" (View-1000)
Nature
Type
ID
Name
ChildOf
Pillar - a weakness that is the most abstract type of weakness and represents a theme for all class/base/variant weaknesses related to it. A Pillar is different from a Category as a Pillar is still technically a type of weakness that describes a mistake, while a Category represents a common characteristic used to group related things.
Improper Control of a Resource Through its Lifetime
ParentOf
Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource.
The different Modes of Introduction provide information
about how and when this
weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which
introduction
may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the
given
phase.
Phase(s)
Note
Architecture and Design
Implementation
Applicable Platforms
This listing shows possible areas for which the given
weakness could appear. These
may be for specific named Languages, Operating Systems, Architectures, Paradigms,
Technologies,
or a class of such platforms. The platform is listed along with how frequently the given
weakness appears for that instance.
Type
Applicable Platforms
Notes
Languages
Class: Not Language-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Architectures
Class: Not Architecture-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Technologies
Class: Not Technology-Specific
(Undetermined Prevalence)
Demonstrative Examples
Example 1
Consider a product that uses an
automated language translation service that is used to
translate vendor-controlled web pages that are used for
technical support. Consider that these web pages include
domain names and email addresses for users to
access.
(bad code)
Example Language: Algorithm
The product invokes the translation service
on the entire message text without any special
treatment or consideration for contact information
such as email addresses and domain.
If the translation is from English to Polish,
then "example.com" might be translated to
"przyklad.com" - a different web site
entirely. Alternately, an email address such as
"address@example.com" could be translated to
"adres@przyklad.com". If an attacker can control the
domain or email address that is generated by the
translation, then the attacker might be able to spoof
communications with the product's users.
(good code)
Example Language: Algorithm
The code could be changed to mark which words
or phrase should not be translated. Alternately, the
original web pages could be structured in a way that
uses templates that insert non-translatable data such
as email addresses. A third option could be to analyze
the resulting output and compare expected data
elements against an allowlist of known-valid
values.
Selected Observed
Examples
Note: this is a curated list of examples for users to understand the variety of ways in which this
weakness can be introduced. It is not a complete list of all CVEs that are related to this CWE entry.
JavaScript URL library does not correctly
parse URLs with leading whitespace.
Detection
Methods
Method
Details
Manual Analysis
Examine inputs that will be saved or
otherwise processed, then look at how they are
produced in output. Analyze outputs that are expected
to be (1) unchanged from the inputs, or (2) changed in
a controlled way. Consider analyzing the data to
extract key elements, such as e-mail addresses or
domain names, to ensure that they are consistent with
the original input.
Effectiveness: Moderate
Note:
These methods could have mixed results
depending on how the product receives the data,
transforms it, and outputs the data. It might require
domain-specific knowledge of the product's intended
behavior in order to determine if some transformations
were correct. These methods could be time-consuming
and not necessarily complete, but there might not be
well-established and well-understood methods for some
subtypes of this weakness.
Automated Dynamic Analysis
Examine inputs that will be saved or
otherwise processed, then look at how they are
produced in output. Analyze outputs that are expected
to be (1) unchanged from the inputs, or (2) changed in
a controlled way. Consider analyzing the data to
extract key elements, such as e-mail addresses or
domain names, to ensure that they are consistent with
the original input.
Effectiveness: Moderate
Note:
These methods could have mixed results
depending on how the product receives the data,
transforms it, and outputs the data. It might require
domain-specific knowledge of the product's intended
behavior in order to determine if some transformations
were correct. These methods could be time-consuming
and not necessarily complete, but there might not be
well-established and well-understood methods for some
subtypes of this weakness.
Memberships
This MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that
reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a
weakness fits within the context of external information sources.
Nature
Type
ID
Name
MemberOf
Grouping - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic.
(this CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review)
Reason
Abstraction
Rationale
This CWE Entry is a Class and might have lower-level children that would be more appropriate
Comments
Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit
Notes
Maintenance
Version: 5.0; Release Date: 2026-10-28
This entry was created in CWE 5.0 to address known gaps in CWE coverage. It is not as complete as other new entries that were published in recent years. The CWE Team plans to work with the CWE community to make this entry more complete in later 5.x releases.
Content
History
Submissions
Submission Date
Submitter
Organization
2026-10-24
(CWE 5.0, 2026-10-28)
CWE Content Team
MITRE
Contributions
Contribution Date
Contributor
Organization
2023-04-11
(CWE 5.0, 2026-10-28)
Michal Biesiada
Suggested inclusion of
erroneous language translation of e-mail addresses,
leading to a demonstrative
example.
More information is available — Please edit the custom filter or select a different filter.
Description
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
