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-117 Base Brouillon
Improper Output Neutralization for Logs
This vulnerability occurs when an application creates log entries using unvalidated external data, allowing attackers to inject malicious characters or commands that can corrupt log files, trigger…
Définition
What is CWE-117?
This vulnerability occurs when an application creates log entries using unvalidated external data, allowing attackers to inject malicious characters or commands that can corrupt log files, trigger parsing errors, or enable log injection attacks.
Log injection happens when user-supplied data containing special characters like newlines (\n), carriage returns (\r), or log-specific control sequences is written directly into log files without proper sanitization. Attackers can exploit this to forge fake log entries, break log file formatting, or obfuscate their malicious activities by injecting deceptive lines that mislead forensic analysis.
To prevent this, developers should treat log entries as structured data rather than free-form text. Always sanitize or encode external inputs before writing them to logs, using appropriate logging frameworks that automatically handle escaping. Consider using parameterized logging functions that separate data from the log message template, which neutralizes dangerous characters while maintaining log integrity and readability.
Impact réel
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-117
-
Chain: inject fake log entries with fake timestamps using CRLF injection
Comment les attaquants l'exploitent
Parcours de l'attaquant étape par étape
- 1
The following web application code attempts to read an integer value from a request object. If the parseInt call fails, then the input is logged with an error message indicating what happened.
- 2
If a user submits the string "twenty-one" for val, the following entry is logged:
- 3
- INFO: Failed to parse val=twenty-one
- 4
However, if an attacker submits the string "twenty-one%0a%0aINFO:+User+logged+out%3dbadguy", the following entry is logged:
- 5
- INFO: Failed to parse val=twenty-one - INFO: User logged out=badguy
Exemple de code vulnérable
Vulnerable Java
The following web application code attempts to read an integer value from a request object. If the parseInt call fails, then the input is logged with an error message indicating what happened.
String val = request.getParameter("val");
try {
int value = Integer.parseInt(val);
}
catch (NumberFormatException) {
log.info("Failed to parse val = " + val);
}
... Exemple de code sécurisé
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.
Liste de contrôle de prévention
How to prevent CWE-117
- 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.
Signaux de détection
How to detect CWE-117
CWE-117
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.
Questions fréquentes Qu'est-ce que CWE-117 ?
Quelle est la gravité de CWE-117 ?
Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-117 ?
Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-117 ?
Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-117 ?
Où puis-je en savoir plus sur CWE-117 ?
Frequently asked questions
Qu'est-ce que CWE-117 ?
This vulnerability occurs when an application creates log entries using unvalidated external data, allowing attackers to inject malicious characters or commands that can corrupt log files, trigger parsing errors, or enable log injection attacks.
Quelle est la gravité de CWE-117 ?
MITRE évalue la probabilité d'exploitation comme Moyenne — l'exploitation est réaliste mais nécessite généralement des conditions spécifiques.
Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-117 ?
MITRE n'a pas spécifié les plateformes affectées pour ce CWE — il peut s'appliquer à la plupart des stacks applicatives.
Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-117 ?
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…
Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-117 ?
Le moteur SAST de Plexicus reconnaît la signature de flux de données de CWE-117 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-117 ?
MITRE publie la définition canonique à https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/117.html. Vous pouvez également consulter la documentation OWASP et NIST pour des conseils adjacents.
Faiblesses associées
Weaknesses related to CWE-117
CWE-116 Parent
Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output
This vulnerability occurs when an application builds a structured message—like a query, command, or request—for another component but…
CWE-644 Frère
Improper Neutralization of HTTP Headers for Scripting Syntax
This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly sanitize or escape user-controlled data placed within HTTP response…
CWE-838 Frère
Inappropriate Encoding for Output Context
This vulnerability occurs when a system uses one type of encoding for its output, but the component receiving that data expects a…
Ressources
Further reading
- MITRE — CWE-117 officiel https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/117.html
- Seven Pernicious Kingdoms: A Taxonomy of Software Security Errors https://samate.nist.gov/SSATTM_Content/papers/Seven%20Pernicious%20Kingdoms%20-%20Taxonomy%20of%20Sw%20Security%20Errors%20-%20Tsipenyuk%20-%20Chess%20-%20McGraw.pdf
- Exploiting Software: How to Break Code http://www.exploitingsoftware.com/
- The night the log was forged http://doc.novsu.ac.ru/oreilly/tcpip/puis/ch10_05.htm
- OWASP TOP 10 https://github.com/owasp-top/owasp-top-2007
Prêt à valider l'essentiel ?
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.