CWE-1021: Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames

Définition

What is CWE-1021?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application fails to properly control whether its pages can be embedded within frames or UI layers from other websites, potentially misleading users about which site they are interacting with.

Modern web applications should actively define which external sites, if any, are permitted to display their content within frames, iframes, or similar embedding elements. Without these security headers (like X-Frame-Options or Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors), your site becomes vulnerable to clickjacking or UI redressing attacks. This allows malicious actors to overlay their own interface on top of yours, tricking users into performing actions unintentionally. To prevent this, developers must implement server-side restrictions that explicitly deny or whitelist permissible domains for embedding. This is a critical client-side security control that protects user interactions and data integrity by ensuring your application's interface is only rendered in a trusted context, preventing confusion and unauthorized actions.

Impact réel

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-1021

CVE-2017-7440

E-mail preview feature in a desktop application allows clickjacking attacks via a crafted e-mail message
CVE-2017-5697

Hardware/firmware product has insufficient clickjacking protection in its web user interface
CVE-2017-4015

Clickjacking in data-loss prevention product via HTTP response header.
CVE-2016-2496

Tapjacking in permission dialog for mobile OS allows access of private storage using a partially-overlapping window.
CVE-2015-1241

Tapjacking in web browser related to page navigation and touch/gesture events.
CVE-2017-0492

System UI in mobile OS allows a malicious application to create a UI overlay of the entire screen to gain privileges.

Comment les attaquants l'exploitent

Parcours de l'attaquant étape par étape

1
Identifier un chemin de code qui traite des entrées non fiables sans validation.
2
Élaborer une charge utile qui exploite le comportement non sécurisé — injection, traversal, débordement ou abus de logique.
3
Délivrer la charge utile via une requête normale et observer la réaction de l'application.
4
Itérer jusqu'à ce que la réponse divulgue des données, exécute le code de l'attaquant ou élève les privilèges.

Exemple de code vulnérable

Vulnerable pseudo

MITRE n'a pas publié d'exemple de code pour ce CWE. Le motif ci-dessous est illustratif — voir Ressources pour les références canoniques.

Vulnérable pseudo

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

Exemple de code sécurisé

Secure pseudo

Sécurisé 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.

Liste de contrôle de prévention

How to prevent CWE-1021

Implementation The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content. The concept of X-Frame-Options is well documented, but implementation of this protection mechanism is in development to cover gaps. There is a need for allowing frames from multiple domains.
Implementation A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed. This is very helpful for legacy browsers that do not support X-Frame-Options security feature previously mentioned. It is also important to note that this tactic has been circumvented or bypassed. Improper usage of frames can persist in the web application through nested frames. The "frame-breaking" script does not intuitively account for multiple nested frames that can be presented to the user.
Implementation This defense-in-depth technique can be used to prevent the improper usage of frames in web applications. It prioritizes the valid sources of data to be loaded into the application through the usage of declarative policies. Based on which implementation of Content Security Policy is in use, the developer should use the "frame-ancestors" directive or the "frame-src" directive to mitigate this weakness. Both directives allow for the placement of restrictions when it comes to allowing embedded content.

Signaux de détection

How to detect CWE-1021

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-1021

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

Questions fréquentes

Frequently asked questions

Qu'est-ce que CWE-1021 ?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application fails to properly control whether its pages can be embedded within frames or UI layers from other websites, potentially misleading users about which site they are interacting with.

Quelle est la gravité de CWE-1021 ?

MITRE n'a pas publié de note de probabilité d'exploitation pour cette faiblesse. Traitez-la comme un impact moyen jusqu'à ce que votre modèle de menace prouve le contraire.

Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-1021 ?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: Web Based.

Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-1021 ?

The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content. The concept of X-Frame-Options is well documented, but implementation of this protection mechanism is in development to cover gaps. There is a need for allowing frames from multiple domains. A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed.…

Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-1021 ?

Le moteur SAST de Plexicus reconnaît la signature de flux de données de CWE-1021 à chaque commit. Lorsqu'une correspondance est trouvée, notre agent Codex Remedium ouvre une PR de correction avec le code corrigé, les tests et un résumé d'une ligne pour le relecteur.

Où puis-je en savoir plus sur CWE-1021 ?

MITRE publie la définition canonique à https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1021.html. Vous pouvez également consulter la documentation OWASP et NIST pour des conseils adjacents.

Faiblesses associées

Weaknesses related to CWE-1021

CWE-441 Parent

Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy')

A confused deputy vulnerability occurs when a system receives a request from a client and forwards it to an external destination without…

CWE-918 Frère

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) occurs when a web application fetches a remote resource based on user-controlled input, but fails to…

Ressources

Prêt à valider ce qui compte.

Plexicus est Proof-Driven AppSec : findings validés, compréhension contextuelle et remédiation relue — ancrée dans la preuve, scopée avec vous.

Réserver un Pentest

Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames