The product declares a critical variable, field, or member to be public when intended security policy requires it to be private.

This issue makes it more difficult to maintain the product, which indirectly affects security by making it more difficult or time-consuming to find and/or fix vulnerabilities. It also might make it easier to introduce vulnerabilities.

Modes Of Introduction

Implementation

Applicable Platforms

Language

Name: C++ (Undetermined)
Name: C# (Undetermined)
Name: Java (Undetermined)

Common Consequences

Observed Examples

Potential Mitigations

Phases : Implementation
Data should be private, static, and final whenever possible. This will assure that your code is protected by instantiating early, preventing access, and preventing tampering.

Detection Methods

Automated Static Analysis

Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
Effectiveness : High

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-960

Automated Source Code Maintainability Measure (ASCMM)
Object Management Group (OMG).
https://www.omg.org/spec/ASCMM/

Submission

Modifications