Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

ABTV

11/29/2019
10:05 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

The Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Errors

'Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer' tops this year's list.

The Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Errors (CWE Top 25) is a list of what has been judged to be the most widespread and critical weaknesses that can lead to serious vulnerabilities in software. These kinds of weaknesses are often easy to find and exploit. They can be dangerous because they can frequently allow threat actors to completely take over execution of software, steal data, or prevent the software from working.

MITRE is saying that this current list is data driven in how it has been approached; using Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) data and related CWE mappings that are found within the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) National Vulnerability Database (NVD), as well as the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) scores associated with each of the CVEs. A scoring formula was then applied by MITRE to determine the level of prevalence and danger each weakness presents.

At the time of the last list compilation eight years ago, the top spot of the list was taken by SQL injection techniques. The 2011 list was constructed by a different method; from surveys conducted of developers, top security analysts, researchers and vendors. It involved some subjectivity on the part of those surveyed.

But this year, it's "Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer" as top dog which shows the changes that have happened to the list. The current top spot is a class level of wide-ranging errors, not one bugaboo. The data-driven approach to generating the list gave rise to solidifying root causes of multiple vulnerabilities into one class-level description.

The 2019 CWE Top 25 leverages NVD data from the years 2017 and 2018, which consisted of approximately 25,000 CVEs. The scoring formula combines the frequency that a CWE is the root cause of a vulnerability with the projected severity of its exploitation. In both cases, the frequency and severity are normalized relative to the minimum and maximum values seen.

So, what kinds of problems will not show up in the list? Weaknesses that are rarely exploited will not receive a high score, regardless of the typical severity associated with any exploitation. Weaknesses with a low impact will not receive a high score, which makes sense. It makes sense that weaknesses that are both common and can cause harm should receive a high score.

The methodology does have limitations. This approach to the list only uses data that was publicly reported and captured in NVD, and there are numerous vulnerabilities exist that do not have CVE IDs. Vulnerabilities which are not included in NVD will be excluded from this approach. The authors of the list also admit that it indirectly prioritizes implementation flaws over design flaws, due to their prevalence within individual software packages.

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.