CWE-175 Variant Draft

Improper Handling of Mixed Encoding

This vulnerability occurs when software fails to correctly process input that contains multiple character encodings within the same data stream.

Definition

What is CWE-175?

This vulnerability occurs when software fails to correctly process input that contains multiple character encodings within the same data stream.

Mixed encoding vulnerabilities happen when an application receives data that switches between different character sets—like UTF-8, UTF-16, ISO-8859-1, or others—without proper normalization. Attackers exploit this by injecting malicious payloads in one encoding that, when misinterpreted by the parser, bypass validation routines designed for a different encoding. This mismatch between what the security checks see and what the backend interpreter processes creates a dangerous gap in your defenses. To prevent this, developers should implement a strict input validation pipeline that first decodes all incoming data into a single, consistent internal character set (like UTF-8) before performing any security checks or processing. This normalization step ensures that validation logic and downstream components are all evaluating the same canonical representation of the data, eliminating the ambiguity that mixed encodings introduce.

Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-175

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

Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

1
Identifiziere einen Codepfad, der nicht vertrauenswürdige Eingaben ohne Validierung verarbeitet.
2
Erzeuge eine Payload, die das unsichere Verhalten auslöst — Injection, Traversal, Overflow oder Logik-Missbrauch.
3
Liefere die Payload über einen normalen Request aus und beobachte die Reaktion der Anwendung.
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-175

Architecture and Design Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
Implementation Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list 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. This 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, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
Implementation Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component.
Implementation Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.

Erkennungssignale

How to detect CWE-175

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-175

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.

Request AI Swarm Pentest

Häufig gestellte Fragen

Frequently asked questions

Was ist CWE-175?

This vulnerability occurs when software fails to correctly process input that contains multiple character encodings within the same data stream.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-175?

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-175 betroffen?

MITRE hat für diese CWE keine betroffenen Plattformen spezifiziert — sie kann in den meisten Anwendungs-Stacks auftreten.

Wie kann ich CWE-175 verhindern?

Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names. Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list 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…

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-175?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-175 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-175?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/175.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Verwandte Schwachstellen

Weaknesses related to CWE-175

CWE-172 Parent

Bereit zu validieren, was zählt.

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

Pentest buchen

Improper Handling of Mixed Encoding

What is CWE-175?

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-175

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

Vulnerable pseudo

Secure pseudo

How to prevent CWE-175

How to detect CWE-175

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

Frequently asked questions

Weaknesses related to CWE-175

Encoding Error

Improper Handling of Alternate Encoding

Double Decoding of the Same Data

Improper Handling of Unicode Encoding

Improper Handling of URL Encoding (Hex Encoding)

Further reading

Bereit zu validieren, was zählt.

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

Anfrage erhalten. Nächsten Schritt buchen.

Sample evidence handover

Server-Side Request Forgery in `webhooks/receiver`