CWE-193 Base Borrador

Off-by-one Error

Q: ¿Qué gravedad tiene CWE-193?

MITRE no ha publicado una calificación de probabilidad de explotación para esta debilidad. Trátala como de impacto medio hasta que tu modelo de amenazas demuestre lo contrario.

Q: ¿Qué lenguajes o plataformas se ven afectados por CWE-193?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: C.

Q: ¿Cómo puedo prevenir CWE-193?

When copying character arrays or using character manipulation methods, the correct size parameter must be used to account for the null terminator that needs to be added at the end of the array. Some examples of functions susceptible to this weakness in C include strcpy(), strncpy(), strcat(), strncat(), printf(), sprintf(), scanf() and sscanf().

Q: ¿Cómo detecta y corrige Plexicus CWE-193?

El motor SAST de Plexicus detecta la firma de flujo de datos para CWE-193 en cada commit. Cuando hay coincidencia, nuestro agente Codex Remedium abre un PR de corrección con el código corregido, las pruebas y un resumen de una línea para el revisor.

Q: ¿Dónde puedo aprender más sobre CWE-193?

MITRE publica la definición canónica en https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/193.html. También puedes consultar la documentación de OWASP y NIST para guías relacionadas.

An off-by-one error occurs when a program incorrectly calculates a boundary, such as a loop counter or array index, by being one unit too high or too low. This often leads to buffer overflows,…

Definición

What is CWE-193?

An off-by-one error occurs when a program incorrectly calculates a boundary, such as a loop counter or array index, by being one unit too high or too low. This often leads to buffer overflows, memory corruption, or unexpected program behavior.

This common programming mistake typically happens when developers use incorrect comparison operators (like <= instead of <) or miscalculate loop termination conditions. It's especially prevalent when dealing with zero-based indexing in arrays, strings, or memory buffers, where the boundary between the last valid element and the first invalid one is easy to misjudge. To prevent off-by-one errors, carefully review all loop conditions and boundary checks, paying close attention to whether your logic uses inclusive or exclusive upper limits. Using standardized container iteration methods (like iterators in C++ or for-each loops in other languages) instead of manual index calculations can eliminate many of these errors entirely.

Impacto en el mundo real

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-193

CVE-2003-0252

Off-by-one error allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via requests that do not contain newlines.
CVE-2001-1391

Off-by-one vulnerability in driver allows users to modify kernel memory.
CVE-2002-0083

Off-by-one error allows local users or remote malicious servers to gain privileges.
CVE-2002-0653

Off-by-one buffer overflow in function usd by server allows local users to execute arbitrary code as the server user via .htaccess files with long entries.
CVE-2002-0844

Off-by-one buffer overflow in version control system allows local users to execute arbitrary code.
CVE-1999-1568

Off-by-one error in FTP server allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service (crash) via a long PORT command.
CVE-2004-0346

Off-by-one buffer overflow in FTP server allows local users to gain privileges via a 1024 byte RETR command.
CVE-2004-0005

Multiple buffer overflows in chat client allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code.

Cómo lo explotan los atacantes

Ruta del atacante paso a paso

1
The following code allocates memory for a maximum number of widgets. It then gets a user-specified number of widgets, making sure that the user does not request too many. It then initializes the elements of the array using InitializeWidget(). Because the number of widgets can vary for each request, the code inserts a NULL pointer to signify the location of the last widget.
2
However, this code contains an off-by-one calculation error (CWE-193). It allocates exactly enough space to contain the specified number of widgets, but it does not include the space for the NULL pointer. As a result, the allocated buffer is smaller than it is supposed to be (CWE-131). So if the user ever requests MAX_NUM_WIDGETS, there is an out-of-bounds write (CWE-787) when the NULL is assigned. Depending on the environment and compilation settings, this could cause memory corruption.
3
In this example, the code does not account for the terminating null character, and it writes one byte beyond the end of the buffer.
4
The first call to strncat() appends up to 20 characters plus a terminating null character to fullname[]. There is plenty of allocated space for this, and there is no weakness associated with this first call. However, the second call to strncat() potentially appends another 20 characters. The code does not account for the terminating null character that is automatically added by strncat(). This terminating null character would be written one byte beyond the end of the fullname[] buffer. Therefore an off-by-one error exists with the second strncat() call, as the third argument should be 19.
5
When using a function like strncat() one must leave a free byte at the end of the buffer for a terminating null character, thus avoiding the off-by-one weakness. Additionally, the last argument to strncat() is the number of characters to append, which must be less than the remaining space in the buffer. Be careful not to just use the total size of the buffer.

Ejemplo de código vulnerable

Vulnerable C

The following code allocates memory for a maximum number of widgets. It then gets a user-specified number of widgets, making sure that the user does not request too many. It then initializes the elements of the array using InitializeWidget(). Because the number of widgets can vary for each request, the code inserts a NULL pointer to signify the location of the last widget.

Vulnerable C

int i;
  unsigned int numWidgets;
  Widget **WidgetList;
  numWidgets = GetUntrustedSizeValue();
  if ((numWidgets == 0) || (numWidgets > MAX_NUM_WIDGETS)) {
  	ExitError("Incorrect number of widgets requested!");
  }
  WidgetList = (Widget **)malloc(numWidgets * sizeof(Widget *));
  printf("WidgetList ptr=%p\n", WidgetList);
  for(i=0; i<numWidgets; i++) {
  	WidgetList[i] = InitializeWidget();
  }
  WidgetList[numWidgets] = NULL;
  showWidgets(WidgetList);

Ejemplo de código seguro

Secure C

When using a function like strncat() one must leave a free byte at the end of the buffer for a terminating null character, thus avoiding the off-by-one weakness. Additionally, the last argument to strncat() is the number of characters to append, which must be less than the remaining space in the buffer. Be careful not to just use the total size of the buffer.

Seguro C

char firstname[20];
  char lastname[20];
  char fullname[40];
  fullname[0] = '\0';
  strncat(fullname, firstname, sizeof(fullname)-strlen(fullname)-1);
  strncat(fullname, lastname, sizeof(fullname)-strlen(fullname)-1);

What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.

Lista de prevención

How to prevent CWE-193

Implementation When copying character arrays or using character manipulation methods, the correct size parameter must be used to account for the null terminator that needs to be added at the end of the array. Some examples of functions susceptible to this weakness in C include strcpy(), strncpy(), strcat(), strncat(), printf(), sprintf(), scanf() and sscanf().

Señales de detección

How to detect CWE-193

Automated Static Analysis High

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-193

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

Preguntas frecuentes

Frequently asked questions

¿Qué es CWE-193?

¿Qué gravedad tiene CWE-193?

MITRE no ha publicado una calificación de probabilidad de explotación para esta debilidad. Trátala como de impacto medio hasta que tu modelo de amenazas demuestre lo contrario.

¿Qué lenguajes o plataformas se ven afectados por CWE-193?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: C.

¿Cómo puedo prevenir CWE-193?

When copying character arrays or using character manipulation methods, the correct size parameter must be used to account for the null terminator that needs to be added at the end of the array. Some examples of functions susceptible to this weakness in C include strcpy(), strncpy(), strcat(), strncat(), printf(), sprintf(), scanf() and sscanf().

¿Cómo detecta y corrige Plexicus CWE-193?

El motor SAST de Plexicus detecta la firma de flujo de datos para CWE-193 en cada commit. Cuando hay coincidencia, nuestro agente Codex Remedium abre un PR de corrección con el código corregido, las pruebas y un resumen de una línea para el revisor.

¿Dónde puedo aprender más sobre CWE-193?

MITRE publica la definición canónica en https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/193.html. También puedes consultar la documentación de OWASP y NIST para guías relacionadas.

Debilidades relacionadas

Weaknesses related to CWE-193

CWE-682 Padre

Listo para validar lo que importa.

Plexicus es Proof-Driven AppSec: hallazgos validados, comprensión contextual y remediación revisada — anclada en evidencia, acotada contigo.

Reservar Pentest

Off-by-one Error

What is CWE-193?

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-193

Ruta del atacante paso a paso

Vulnerable C

Secure C

How to prevent CWE-193

How to detect CWE-193

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

Frequently asked questions

Weaknesses related to CWE-193

Incorrect Calculation

Wrap-around Error

Incorrect Calculation of Buffer Size

Incorrect Bitwise Shift of Integer

Insufficient Precision or Accuracy of a Real Number

Incorrect Calculation of Multi-Byte String Length

Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Integer Underflow (Wrap or Wraparound)

Divide By Zero

Further reading

Listo para validar lo que importa.

Comprueba si el AI Swarm Pentest encaja en tu entorno.

Solicitud recibida. Reserva el siguiente paso.

Sample evidence handover

Server-Side Request Forgery in `webhooks/receiver`