<noframes id="vfxvr">

    <track id="vfxvr"></track>

      <span id="vfxvr"></span>

          CWE-95 動態執行代碼中指令轉義處理不恰當(Eval注入)

          Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')

          結構: Simple

          Abstraction: Variant

          狀態: Incomplete

          被利用可能性: Medium


          The software receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes code syntax before using the input in a dynamic evaluation call (e.g. "eval").


          This may allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code, or at least modify what code can be executed.


          • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 94 cwe_View_ID: 1000 cwe_Ordinal: Primary

          • cwe_Nature: ChildOf cwe_CWE_ID: 94 cwe_View_ID: 699 cwe_Ordinal: Primary


          Language: [{'cwe_Name': 'Java', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Name': 'JavaScript', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Name': 'Python', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Name': 'Perl', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Name': 'PHP', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Name': 'Ruby', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}, {'cwe_Class': 'Interpreted', 'cwe_Prevalence': 'Undetermined'}]


          范圍 影響 注釋
          Confidentiality ['Read Files or Directories', 'Read Application Data'] The injected code could access restricted data / files.
          Access Control Bypass Protection Mechanism In some cases, injectable code controls authentication; this may lead to a remote vulnerability.
          Access Control Gain Privileges or Assume Identity Injected code can access resources that the attacker is directly prevented from accessing.
          ['Integrity', 'Confidentiality', 'Availability', 'Other'] Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands Code injection attacks can lead to loss of data integrity in nearly all cases as the control-plane data injected is always incidental to data recall or writing. Additionally, code injection can often result in the execution of arbitrary code.
          Non-Repudiation Hide Activities Often the actions performed by injected control code are unlogged.


          ['Architecture and Design', 'Implementation']


          If possible, refactor your code so that it does not need to use eval() at all.

          MIT-5 Implementation

          策略: Input Validation

          Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a whitelist 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 of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs (i.e., do not rely on a blacklist). A blacklist is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, blacklists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.



          Inputs 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 whitelist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control. Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.


          edit-config.pl: This CGI script is used to modify settings in a configuration file.

          bad Perl

          use CGI qw(:standard);

          sub config_file_add_key {
          my ($fname, $key, $arg) = @;

          # code to add a field/key to a file goes here

          sub config_file_set_key {
          my ($fname, $key, $arg) = @;

          # code to set key to a particular file goes here

          sub config_file_delete_key {
          my ($fname, $key, $arg) = @;

          # code to delete key from a particular file goes here

          sub handleConfigAction {
          my ($fname, $action) = @;
          my $key = param('key');
          my $val = param('val');

          # this is super-efficient code, especially if you have to invoke

          # any one of dozens of different functions!

          my $code = "config_file_$action_key(\$fname, \$key, \$val);";

          $configfile = "/home/cwe/config.txt";
          print header;
          if (defined(param('action'))) {
          handleConfigAction($configfile, param('action'));
          else {
          print "No action specified!\n";

          The script intends to take the 'action' parameter and invoke one of a variety of functions based on the value of that parameter - config_file_add_key(), config_file_set_key(), or config_file_delete_key(). It could set up a conditional to invoke each function separately, but eval() is a powerful way of doing the same thing in fewer lines of code, especially when a large number of functions or variables are involved. Unfortunately, in this case, the attacker can provide other values in the action parameter, such as:


          add_key(",","); system("/bin/ls");

          This would produce the following string in handleConfigAction():


          config_file_add_key(",","); system("/bin/ls");

          Any arbitrary Perl code could be added after the attacker has "closed off" the construction of the original function call, in order to prevent parsing errors from causing the malicious eval() to fail before the attacker's payload is activated. This particular manipulation would fail after the system() call, because the "_key(\$fname, \$key, \$val)" portion of the string would cause an error, but this is irrelevant to the attack because the payload has already been activated.


          標識 說明 鏈接
          CVE-2008-5071 Eval injection in PHP program. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2008-5071
          CVE-2002-1750 Eval injection in Perl program. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1750
          CVE-2008-5305 Eval injection in Perl program using an ID that should only contain hyphens and numbers. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2008-5305
          CVE-2002-1752 Direct code injection into Perl eval function. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1752
          CVE-2002-1753 Eval injection in Perl program. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2002-1753
          CVE-2005-1527 Direct code injection into Perl eval function. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1527
          CVE-2005-2837 Direct code injection into Perl eval function. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2837
          CVE-2005-1921 MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-1921
          CVE-2005-2498 MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-2498
          CVE-2005-3302 Code injection into Python eval statement from a field in a formatted file. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-3302
          CVE-2007-1253 Eval injection in Python program. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2007-1253
          CVE-2001-1471 chain: Resultant eval injection. An invalid value prevents initialization of variables, which can be modified by attacker and later injected into PHP eval statement. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2001-1471
          CVE-2007-2713 Chain: Execution after redirect triggers eval injection. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2007-2713


          Other Factors: special character errors can play a role in increasing the variety of code that can be injected, although some vulnerabilities do not require special characters at all, e.g. when a single function without arguments can be referenced and a terminator character is not necessary. Research Gap This issue is probably under-reported. Most relevant CVEs have been for Perl and PHP, but eval injection applies to most interpreted languages. Javascript eval injection is likely to be heavily under-reported.


          映射的分類名 ImNode ID Fit Mapped Node Name
          PLOVER Direct Dynamic Code Evaluation ('Eval Injection')
          OWASP Top Ten 2007 A3 CWE More Specific Malicious File Execution
          OWASP Top Ten 2004 A6 CWE More Specific Injection Flaws
          Software Fault Patterns SFP24 Tainted input to command
          SEI CERT Perl Coding Standard IDS35-PL Exact Do not invoke the eval form with a string argument


          • CAPEC-35


          欧美日韩国产亚洲,天天射影院,大芭蕉天天视频在线观看,欧美肥老太牲交大片,奇米色888,黄三级高清在线播放,国产卡一卡二卡三卡四,亚洲第一黄色视频 日韩中文字幕中文有码,日本A级作爱片一,奇米第四,三级片短片视频免费在线观看,奇米网狠狠网,影音先锋色AV男人资源网,日本丰满熟妇hd 日本日韩中文字幕无区码,涩 色 爱 性,天天射影视,中文字幕制服丝袜第57页,777米奇影院奇米网狠狠,尤物TV国产精品看片在线,欧洲女同牲恋牲交视频 久久AV天堂日日综合,亚洲性爱影院色yeye,日韩亚洲欧美Av精品,十八禁全身裸露全彩漫画,奇米网影视,人人爽人人澡人人人妻,动漫AV专区,天天色综合影院 日韩精品中文字幕,特级无码毛片免费视频,人妻少妇不卡无码视频,制服丝袜有码中文字幕在线,深爱激动情网婷婷,影音先锋全部色先锋,香港三级日本三级韩级人妇 日韩欧美亚洲综合久久在线视频,2021XX性影院,玖玖资源站最稳定网址,日韩亚洲制服丝袜中文字幕,国产超碰人人模人人爽人人喊,先锋色熟女丝袜资源 很黄特别刺激又免费的视频,2021一本久道在线线观看,色中娱乐黄色大片,日本高清不卡在线观看播放,97国产自在现线免费视频,国产在线精品亚洲第一区 免费中文字幕精品一区二区 视频,狠狠爱俺也色,天天好逼网,日韩制服丝袜,国产女人大象蕉视频在线观看,国产 精品 自在 线免费,午夜时刻在线观看