CWE-1073 Base Incomplete

Non-SQL Invokable Control Element with Excessive Number of Data Resource Accesses

This weakness occurs when a client-side function or method makes an excessive number of individual data requests through a non-SQL data manager, instead of using more efficient bulk operations or…

Definition

What is CWE-1073?

This weakness occurs when a client-side function or method makes an excessive number of individual data requests through a non-SQL data manager, instead of using more efficient bulk operations or database-native capabilities.
This pattern forces the application to handle data piecemeal, creating significant performance overhead. Each request adds network latency and processing time, slowing down the entire operation. While what constitutes "excessive" can vary by context, a common guideline (like CISQ's) suggests limiting functions to a maximum of two data access calls to maintain responsiveness. If an attacker can trigger this inefficient code path, the performance degradation can be exploited to cause denial-of-service (DoS) by exhausting server resources. To fix this, developers should consolidate data requests, implement server-side filtering or aggregation, and leverage the data layer's built-in efficient querying features instead of manual, iterative fetching.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-1073

Bisher sind in MITREs Katalog keine öffentlichen CVE-Referenzen mit dieser CWE verknüpft.

Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

  1. 1

    Identifiziere einen Codepfad, der nicht vertrauenswürdige Eingaben ohne Validierung verarbeitet.

  2. 2

    Erzeuge eine Payload, die das unsichere Verhalten auslöst — Injection, Traversal, Overflow oder Logik-Missbrauch.

  3. 3

    Liefere die Payload über einen normalen Request aus und beobachte die Reaktion der Anwendung.

  4. 4

    Iteriere, bis die Antwort Daten preisgibt, Angreifer-Code ausführt oder Berechtigungen eskaliert.

Verwundbares Codebeispiel

Vulnerable pseudo

MITRE hat kein Codebeispiel für diese CWE veröffentlicht. Das untenstehende Muster ist illustrativ — kanonische Referenzen findest du unter Ressourcen.

Verwundbar pseudo
// Example pattern — see MITRE for the canonical references.
function handleRequest(input) {
  // Untrusted input flows directly into the sensitive sink.
  return executeUnsafe(input);
}
Sicheres Codebeispiel

Secure pseudo

Sicher pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
  const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
  return executeWithGuards(safe);
}
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Präventions-Checkliste

How to prevent CWE-1073

  • Architecture Use safe-by-default frameworks and APIs that prevent the unsafe pattern from being expressible.
  • Implementation Validate input at trust boundaries; use allowlists, not denylists.
  • Implementation Apply the principle of least privilege to credentials, file paths, and runtime permissions.
  • Testing Cover this weakness in CI: SAST rules + targeted unit tests for the data flow.
  • Operation Monitor logs for the runtime signals listed in the next section.
Erkennungssignale

How to detect CWE-1073

SAST High

Führe statische Analyse (SAST) auf der Codebasis aus und suche im Datenfluss nach dem unsicheren Muster.

DAST Moderate

Führe dynamische Application-Security-Tests gegen den Live-Endpoint aus.

Runtime Moderate

Beobachte Runtime-Logs auf ungewöhnliche Exception-Traces, fehlerhafte Eingaben oder Versuche, Autorisierung zu umgehen.

Code review Moderate

Code Review: Markiere jeden neuen Code, der Eingaben von dieser Oberfläche ohne validierte Framework-Helper verarbeitet.

CWE-1073

Don't catalog this weakness. Prove it's reachable.

Plexicus turns CWE catalogs into evidence: every CWE-pattern is matched against your real code graph, reach is proven on a sandbox clone, and verified findings ship as reviewed PRs.

Häufig gestellte Fragen

Frequently asked questions

Was ist CWE-1073?

This weakness occurs when a client-side function or method makes an excessive number of individual data requests through a non-SQL data manager, instead of using more efficient bulk operations or database-native capabilities.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-1073?

MITRE hat für diese Schwachstelle keine Exploit-Wahrscheinlichkeit veröffentlicht. Behandle sie als mittlere Auswirkung, bis dein Threat Model anderes belegt.

Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-1073 betroffen?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: SQL, Database Server.

Wie kann ich CWE-1073 verhindern?

Use safe-by-default frameworks, validate untrusted input at trust boundaries, and apply the principle of least privilege. Cover the data-flow signature in CI with SAST.

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-1073?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-1073 bei jedem Commit. Bei einem Treffer öffnet unser Codex-Remedium-Agent einen Fix-PR mit korrigiertem Code, Tests und einer einzeiligen Zusammenfassung für den Reviewer.

Wo erfahre ich mehr über CWE-1073?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1073.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Verwandte Schwachstellen

Weaknesses related to CWE-1073

CWE-405 Parent

Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification)

This vulnerability occurs when a system allows an attacker to trigger a disproportionate amount of resource consumption—like CPU, memory,…

CWE-1050 Sibling

Excessive Platform Resource Consumption within a Loop

This vulnerability occurs when a loop contains code that repeatedly consumes critical system resources like file handles, database…

CWE-1072 Sibling

Data Resource Access without Use of Connection Pooling

This weakness occurs when an application creates a new database connection for every request instead of using a managed connection pool.…

CWE-1084 Sibling

Invokable Control Element with Excessive File or Data Access Operations

This weakness occurs when a single function or method performs an excessive number of file or database operations, such as repeated reads,…

CWE-1089 Sibling

Large Data Table with Excessive Number of Indices

This weakness occurs when an application uses a database table with a very large number of rows and creates too many indexes on it,…

CWE-1094 Sibling

Excessive Index Range Scan for a Data Resource

This weakness occurs when a database query performs an index range scan that can access an unnecessarily large number of rows from a…

CWE-1176 Sibling

Inefficient CPU Computation

This weakness occurs when software uses inefficient algorithms or suboptimal CPU operations, performing unnecessary or overly complex…

CWE-406 Sibling

Insufficient Control of Network Message Volume (Network Amplification)

This vulnerability occurs when a system fails to properly limit the amount of network traffic it can generate in response to a request,…

CWE-407 Sibling

Inefficient Algorithmic Complexity

This vulnerability occurs when a software component uses an algorithm with poor worst-case performance. An attacker can exploit this by…

Bereit, das Wesentliche zu validieren?

Bereit zu validieren, was zählt.

Plexicus ist Proof-Driven AppSec: validierte Funde, kontextuelles Verständnis und geprüfte Remediation — in Evidenz verankert, mit Ihnen gescoped.

Qualifizierung

Prüfen Sie, ob AI Swarm Pentest zu Ihrer Umgebung passt.

Teilen Sie den wichtigsten Kontext. Wir prüfen den Umfang und nennen den nächsten kommerziellen Schritt.

Vor dem Absenden — prüfen Sie, ob Sie passen

0 / 280

Keine Verpflichtung. Wenn Sie nicht passen, sagen wir es Ihnen.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorized target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)
Private Runde Für Investoren