CWE-463 Detail

CWE-463

Deletion of Data Structure Sentinel
Incomplete
2006-07-19 00:00 +00:00
2023-06-29 00:00 +00:00

Alerte pour un CWE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CWE.
Alert management

Deletion of Data Structure Sentinel

The accidental deletion of a data-structure sentinel can cause serious programming logic problems.

Extended Description

Often times data-structure sentinels are used to mark structure of the data structure. A common example of this is the null character at the end of strings. Another common example is linked lists which may contain a sentinel to mark the end of the list. It is dangerous to allow this type of control data to be easily accessible. Therefore, it is important to protect from the deletion or modification outside of some wrapper interface which provides safety.

Informations

Modes Of Introduction

Implementation

Applicable Platforms

Language

Name: C (Undetermined)
Name: C++ (Undetermined)

Common Consequences

Scope Impact Likelihood
Availability
Other
Other

Note: Generally this error will cause the data structure to not work properly.
Authorization
Other
Other

Note: If a control character, such as NULL is removed, one may cause resource access control problems.

Potential Mitigations

Phases : Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Phases : Build and Compilation

Run or compile the software using features or extensions that automatically provide a protection mechanism that mitigates or eliminates buffer overflows.

For example, certain compilers and extensions provide automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are built into the compiled code. Examples include the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice.


Phases : Operation
Use OS-level preventative functionality. Not a complete solution.

Vulnerability Mapping Notes

Rationale : This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.
Comments : Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.

References

REF-18

The CLASP Application Security Process
Secure Software, Inc..
https://cwe.mitre.org/documents/sources/TheCLASPApplicationSecurityProcess.pdf

REF-62

The Art of Software Security Assessment
Mark Dowd, John McDonald, Justin Schuh.

Submission

Name Organization Date Date Release Version
CLASP 2006-07-19 +00:00 2006-07-19 +00:00 Draft 3

Modifications

Name Organization Date Comment
Eric Dalci Cigital 2008-07-01 +00:00 updated Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-09-08 +00:00 updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-07-27 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-10-29 +00:00 updated Description, Other_Notes
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-06-01 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-05-11 +00:00 updated References, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-10-30 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2014-07-30 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2017-11-08 +00:00 updated Demonstrative_Examples
CWE Content Team MITRE 2020-02-24 +00:00 updated References, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-04-27 +00:00 updated Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-06-29 +00:00 updated Mapping_Notes
Click on the button to the left (OFF), to authorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site. Click on the button to the left (Accept all), to unauthorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site.