Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
CWE-483 Base Draft
Incorrect Block Delimitation
This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.
Definition
What is CWE-483?
This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.
In programming languages like JavaScript, Python, or Go, braces, indentation, or keywords are sometimes optional for single-statement blocks. However, when you intend for multiple statements to execute together—such as within an `if` condition or a loop—omitting the explicit block delimiter means only the first statement is controlled by that condition. Subsequent statements execute unconditionally, creating a critical logic error.
This error often manifests as a subtle bug where security-critical operations, like privilege checks or input validation, are bypassed. For example, an access control check might only guard a logging statement while allowing the actual data transaction to proceed without authorization. Always use explicit delimiters for multi-statement blocks to ensure your code's logic and security controls behave as intended.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-483
-
incorrect indentation of "goto" statement makes it more difficult to detect an incorrect goto (Apple's "goto fail")
Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen
Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt
- 1
In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.
- 2
This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.
- 3
In this example, the programmer has indented the Do_Y() statement as if the intention is that the function should be associated with the preceding conditional and should only be called when the condition is true. However, because Do_X() was called on the same line as the conditional and there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.
- 4
This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.
Verwundbares Codebeispiel
Vulnerable C
In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.
if (condition==true)
Do_X();
Do_Y(); Sicheres Codebeispiel
Secure 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-483
- Implementation Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.
Erkennungssignale
How to detect CWE-483
CWE-483
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 Was ist CWE-483?
Wie gravierend ist CWE-483?
Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-483 betroffen?
Wie kann ich CWE-483 verhindern?
Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-483?
Wo erfahre ich mehr über CWE-483?
Frequently asked questions
Was ist CWE-483?
This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.
Wie gravierend ist CWE-483?
MITRE stuft die Exploit-Wahrscheinlichkeit als niedrig ein — eine Ausnutzung ist selten, die Schwachstelle sollte aber dennoch behoben werden, sobald sie entdeckt wird.
Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-483 betroffen?
MITRE lists the following affected platforms: C, C++.
Wie kann ich CWE-483 verhindern?
Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.
Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-483?
Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-483 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-483?
MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/483.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.
Verwandte Schwachstellen
Weaknesses related to CWE-483
CWE-670 Parent
Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation
This weakness occurs when a section of code is structured in a way that always executes incorrectly, regardless of input or conditions.…
CWE-480 Sibling
Use of Incorrect Operator
This vulnerability occurs when a developer mistakenly uses the wrong operator in their code, leading to unintended and potentially…
CWE-484 Sibling
Omitted Break Statement in Switch
This vulnerability occurs when a developer forgets to include a 'break' statement inside a switch-case block. Without it, the code…
CWE-617 Sibling
Reachable Assertion
A reachable assertion occurs when an attacker can trigger an assert() statement or similar debugging check, causing the application to…
CWE-698 Sibling
Execution After Redirect (EAR)
Execution After Redirect (EAR) occurs when a web application sends a redirect response to a user's browser but continues to run…
CWE-783 Sibling
Operator Precedence Logic Error
This vulnerability occurs when a developer writes a conditional expression where the intended logic is broken due to misunderstanding or…
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.