Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1310 CNY

100%

CWE-88 (参数注入或修改) — Vulnerability Class 161

161 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-88 (参数注入或修改). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-88 represents a critical input validation weakness where software constructs command strings without properly delimiting arguments, options, or switches intended for external components. This flaw typically arises when developers interpolate user-controlled data directly into command lines, mistakenly assuming that only specified arguments will be processed. Attackers exploit this by injecting additional arguments or switches that alter the command’s behavior, potentially leading to unauthorized code execution or privilege escalation. To mitigate this risk, developers must strictly validate and sanitize all inputs before inclusion in command strings. Best practices include using parameterized APIs that separate commands from arguments, avoiding shell interpreters when possible, and employing allowlists to restrict acceptable input formats. By ensuring robust argument separation and rigorous input filtering, organizations can effectively prevent attackers from manipulating command execution contexts and maintain system integrity against injection-based attacks.

MITRE CWE Description
The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string. When creating commands using interpolation into a string, developers may assume that only the arguments/options that they specify will be processed. This assumption may be even stronger when the programmer has encoded the command in a way that prevents separate commands from being provided maliciously, e.g. in the case of shell metacharacters. When constructing the command, the developer may use whitespace or other delimiters that are required to separate arguments when the command. However, if an attacker can provide an untrusted input that contains argument-separating delimiters, then the resulting command will have more arguments than intended by the developer. The attacker may then be able to change the behavior of the command. Depending on the functionality supported by the extraneous arguments, this may have security-relevant consequences.
Common Consequences (1)
Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability, OtherExecute Unauthorized Code or Commands, Alter Execution Logic, Read Application Data, Modify Application Data
An attacker could include arguments that allow unintended commands or code to be executed, allow sensitive data to be read or modified or could cause other unintended behavior.
Mitigations (5)
ImplementationWhere possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the command. For example, in PHP, escapeshellarg() can be used to escape a single argument to system(), or …
Effectiveness: High
Architecture and DesignUnderstand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your product: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, request headers as well as content, URL components, e-mail, files, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Perform input validation at well-defined interfaces.
ImplementationAssume 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…
ImplementationDirectly convert your input type into the expected data type, such as using a conversion function that translates a string into a number. After converting to the expected data type, ensure that the input's values fall within the expected range of allowable values and that multi-field consistencies are maintained.
ImplementationInputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalizat…
Examples (2)
Consider the following program. It intends to perform an "ls -l" on an input filename. The validate_name() subroutine performs validation on the input to make sure that only alphanumeric and "-" characters are allowed, which avoids path traversal (CWE-22) and OS command injection (CWE-78) weaknesses. Only filenames like "abc" or "d-e-f" are intended to be allowed.
my $arg = GetArgument("filename"); do_listing($arg); sub do_listing { my($fname) = @_; if (! validate_name($fname)) { print "Error: name is not well-formed!\n"; return; } # build command my $cmd = "/bin/ls -l $fname"; system($cmd); } sub validate_name { my($name) = @_; if ($name =~ /^[\w\-]+$/) { return(1); } else { return(0); } }
Bad · Perl
if ($name =~ /^\w[\w\-]+$/) ...
Good · Perl
CVE-2016-10033 / [REF-1249] provides a useful real-world example of this weakness within PHPMailer.
CVE IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2021-21386 Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Decompiling Package Process — apkleaks 9.3 Critical2021-03-24
CVE-2021-21384 Null characters not escaped in shescape — shescape 6.3 Medium2021-03-18
CVE-2021-24030 Facebook Gameroom 参数注入漏洞 — Facebook Gameroom 9.8 -2021-03-10
CVE-2020-27129 Cisco SD-WAN vManage Software Command Injection Vulnerability — Cisco SD-WAN vManage 6.7 Medium2020-11-06
CVE-2020-3380 Cisco Data Center Network Manager Privilege Escalation Vulnerability — Cisco Data Center Network Manager 6.7 -2020-07-16
CVE-2020-7496 Schneider Electric EcoStruxure Operator Terminal Expert 参数注入漏洞 — EcoStruxure Operator Terminal Expert 3.1 Service Pack 1 and prior (formerly known as Vijeo XD) 7.8 -2020-06-16
CVE-2020-1738 Ansible 参数注入漏洞 — ansible 3.9 Low2020-03-16
CVE-2019-5012 Wacom driver 参数注入漏洞 — Wacom 7.8 -2019-10-24
CVE-2019-5013 Wacom driver 参数注入漏洞 — Wacom 7.8 -2019-10-24
CVE-2019-3931 Crestron Electronics AM-100和Crestron Electronics AM-101 参数注入漏洞 — Crestron AirMedia 8.8 -2019-04-30
CVE-2017-1001003 Math.js 安全漏洞 — math.js 9.8 -2017-11-27

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-88 (参数注入或修改) represent 161 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.