CWE

Common Weakness Enumeration

A community-developed list of SW & HW weaknesses that can become vulnerabilities
New to CWE? click here!
CWE Most Important Hardware Weaknesses
CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Weaknesses
Home > CWE List > CWE-130: Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency (4.18)
ID
CWE Glossary Definition

CWE-130: Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency

Weakness ID: 130
Vulnerability Mapping: ALLOWED This CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities
Abstraction: Base Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
View customized information:
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


Description
The product parses a formatted message or structure, but it does not handle or incorrectly handles a length field that is inconsistent with the actual length of the associated data.
Extended Description
If an attacker can manipulate the length parameter associated with an input such that it is inconsistent with the actual length of the input, this can be leveraged to cause the target application to behave in unexpected, and possibly, malicious ways. One of the possible motives for doing so is to pass in arbitrarily large input to the application. Another possible motivation is the modification of application state by including invalid data for subsequent properties of the application. Such weaknesses commonly lead to attacks such as buffer overflows and execution of arbitrary code.
Alternate Terms
length manipulation
length tampering
Common Consequences
Section HelpThis 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

Read Memory; Modify Memory; Varies by Context

Scope: Confidentiality, Integrity

Potential Mitigations
Phase(s) Mitigation

Implementation
When processing structured incoming data containing a size field followed by raw data, ensure that you identify and resolve any inconsistencies between the size field and the actual size of the data.

Implementation
Do not let the user control the size of the buffer.

Implementation
Validate that the length of the user-supplied data is consistent with the buffer size.
Relationships
Section Help 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 and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore.
Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (View-1000)
Nature Type ID Name
ChildOf Base Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource. 240 Improper Handling of Inconsistent Structural Elements
CanPrecede Base Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource. 805 Buffer Access with Incorrect Length Value
Relevant to the view "Software Development" (View-699)
Nature Type ID Name
MemberOf Category Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. 19 Data Processing Errors
Relevant to the view "CISQ Quality Measures (2020)" (View-1305)
Nature Type ID Name
ChildOf Class 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. 119 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer
Relevant to the view "CISQ Data Protection Measures" (View-1340)
Nature Type ID Name
ChildOf Class 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. 119 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer
Modes Of Introduction
Section HelpThe 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 Note
Implementation
Applicable Platforms
Section HelpThis 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.
Languages

C (Sometimes Prevalent)

C++ (Sometimes Prevalent)

Class: Not Language-Specific (Undetermined Prevalence)

Demonstrative Examples

Example 1


In the following C/C++ example the method processMessageFromSocket() will get a message from a socket, placed into a buffer, and will parse the contents of the buffer into a structure that contains the message length and the message body. A for loop is used to copy the message body into a local character string which will be passed to another method for processing.

(bad code)
Example Language: C
int processMessageFromSocket(int socket) {
int success;

char buffer[BUFFER_SIZE];
char message[MESSAGE_SIZE];

// get message from socket and store into buffer

//Ignoring possibliity that buffer > BUFFER_SIZE
if (getMessage(socket, buffer, BUFFER_SIZE) > 0) {

// place contents of the buffer into message structure
ExMessage *msg = recastBuffer(buffer);

// copy message body into string for processing
int index;
for (index = 0; index < msg->msgLength; index++) {
message[index] = msg->msgBody[index];
}
message[index] = '0円';

// process message
success = processMessage(message);
}
return success;
}

However, the message length variable (msgLength) from the structure is used as the condition for ending the for loop without validating that msgLength accurately reflects the actual length of the message body (CWE-606). If msgLength indicates a length that is longer than the size of a message body (CWE-130), then this can result in a buffer over-read by reading past the end of the buffer (CWE-126).



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.

Reference Description
Chain: "Heartbleed" bug receives an inconsistent length parameter (CWE-130) enabling an out-of-bounds read (CWE-126), returning memory that could include private cryptographic keys and other sensitive data.
Web application firewall consumes excessive memory when an HTTP request contains a large Content-Length value but no POST data.
Buffer overflow in internal string handling routine allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a length argument of zero or less, which disables the length check.
Web server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via an HTTP request with a content-length value that is larger than the size of the request, which prevents server from timing out the connection.
Service does not properly check the specified length of a cookie, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a buffer overflow, or brute force authentication by using a short cookie length.
Traffic analyzer allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via invalid IPv4 or IPv6 prefix lengths, possibly triggering a buffer overflow.
Chat client allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary commands via a JPEG image containing a comment with an illegal field length of 1.
Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via a negative Content-Length HTTP header field causing a heap-based buffer overflow.
Help program allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a heap-based buffer overflow caused by a .CHM file with a large length field
Name services does not properly validate the length of certain packets, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code. Can overlap zero-length issues
Policy manager allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code via an HTTP POST request with an invalid Content-Length value.
Heap-based buffer overflow in library allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a modified record length field in an SSLv2 client hello message.
When domain logons are enabled, server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a SAM_UAS_CHANGE request with a length value that is larger than the number of structures that are provided.
Multiple SSH2 servers and clients do not properly handle packets or data elements with incorrect length specifiers, which may allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service or possibly execute arbitrary code.
Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU and memory exhaustion) via a POST request with a Content-Length header set to -1.
Multiple buffer overflows in xml library that may allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via long URLs.
Application does not properly validate the length of a value that is saved in a session file, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a malicious session file (.ht), web site, or Telnet URL contained in an e-mail message, triggering a buffer overflow.
Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a remote password array with an invalid length, which triggers a heap-based buffer overflow.
Product allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via an SMB packet that specifies a smaller buffer length than is required.
Server allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a LoginExt packet for a Cleartext Password User Authentication Method (UAM) request with a PathName argument that includes an AFPName type string that is longer than the associated length field.
PDF viewer allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a PDF file with a large /Encrypt /Length keyLength value.
SVN client trusts the length field of SVN protocol URL strings, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via an integer overflow that leads to a heap-based buffer overflow.
Is effectively an accidental double increment of a counter that prevents a length check conditional from exiting a loop.
Length field of a request not verified.
Buffer overflow by modifying a length value.
Weakness Ordinalities
Ordinality Description
Primary
(where the weakness exists independent of other weaknesses)
Memberships
Section HelpThis 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 CategoryCategory - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. 990 SFP Secondary Cluster: Tainted Input to Command
MemberOf CategoryCategory - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. 1407 Comprehensive Categorization: Improper Neutralization
Vulnerability Mapping Notes
Usage ALLOWED
(this CWE ID may be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities)
Reason Acceptable-Use

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.
Notes

Relationship

This probably overlaps other categories including zero-length issues.
Taxonomy Mappings
Mapped Taxonomy Name Node ID Fit Mapped Node Name
PLOVER Length Parameter Inconsistency
Software Fault Patterns SFP24 Tainted Input to Command
Content History
Submissions
Submission Date Submitter Organization
2006年07月19日
(CWE Draft 3, 2006年07月19日) 		PLOVER
Modifications
Modification Date Modifier Organization
2025年09月09日
(CWE 4.18, 2025年09月09日) 		CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Demonstrative_Examples
2024年02月29日
(CWE 4.14, 2024年02月29日) 		CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Observed_Examples
2023年06月29日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Mapping_Notes
2023年04月27日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
2023年01月31日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Description
2022年10月13日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Taxonomy_Mappings
2020年12月10日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships
2020年08月20日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships
2020年06月25日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples
2020年02月24日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships
2017年11月08日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Applicable_Platforms, Causal_Nature, Demonstrative_Examples
2017年01月19日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Type
2014年07月30日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Relationships
2014年06月23日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Observed_Examples
2013年07月17日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Type
2012年10月30日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Potential_Mitigations
2012年05月11日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Observed_Examples, Relationships
2011年06月27日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Common_Consequences
2011年06月01日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Common_Consequences
2011年03月29日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Demonstrative_Examples
2010年12月13日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Potential_Mitigations
2010年02月16日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Description, Potential_Mitigations, Relationships
2009年12月28日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Observed_Examples
2009年03月10日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Description, Name
2008年09月08日 CWE Content Team MITRE
updated Applicable_Platforms, Description, Name, Relationships, Observed_Example, Relationship_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities
2008年07月01日 Eric Dalci Cigital
updated Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction
Previous Entry Names
Change Date Previous Entry Name
2008年09月09日 Length Parameter Inconsistency
2009年03月10日 Failure to Handle Length Parameter Inconsistency
More information is available — Please edit the custom filter or select a different filter.
Page Last Updated: September 09, 2025

Use of the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE™) and the associated references from this website are subject to the Terms of Use. CWE is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and managed by the Homeland Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute (HSSEDI) which is operated by The MITRE Corporation (MITRE). Copyright © 2006–2025, The MITRE Corporation. CWE, CWSS, CWRAF, and the CWE logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /