CWE-67 Variante Incompleto High likelihood

Improper Handling of Windows Device Names

This vulnerability occurs when an application builds file paths from user input but fails to properly recognize or handle Windows reserved device names like AUX, CON, or COM1. Attackers can exploit…

Definição

What is CWE-67?

This vulnerability occurs when an application builds file paths from user input but fails to properly recognize or handle Windows reserved device names like AUX, CON, or COM1. Attackers can exploit this by submitting these special names, which typically causes the application to crash, hang, or leak sensitive information when it tries to access them as regular files.
Windows reserves certain filenames like AUX, CON, PRN, COM1, and LPT1 for internal device access. When an application accepts user-controlled input for filenames or paths without filtering these names, it may attempt to open a system device instead of a file. This often triggers unexpected errors, leading to application denial of service or revealing internal error details in logs or web responses. Beyond crashes, this flaw can bypass security filters. If an application's validation logic doesn't block these reserved names, an attacker might upload a malicious file disguised as a device name, or inject a device path into a URL parameter. This can disrupt file processing routines, expose stack traces or configuration data, and in some cases, be combined with other weaknesses to execute arbitrary commands.
Impacto no mundo real

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-67

  • Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a series of requests to .JSP files that contain an MS-DOS device name.

  • Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via an HTTP request for an MS-DOS device name.

  • Product allows remote attackers to use MS-DOS device names in HTTP requests to cause a denial of service or obtain the physical path of the server.

  • Server allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a URL that contains an MS-DOS device name.

  • Server allows a remote attacker to create a denial of service via a URL request which includes a MS-DOS device name.

  • Microsoft Windows 9x operating systems allow an attacker to cause a denial of service via a pathname that includes file device names, aka the "DOS Device in Path Name" vulnerability.

  • Server allows remote attackers to determine the physical path of the server via a URL containing MS-DOS device names.

  • Product does not properly handle files whose names contain reserved MS-DOS device names, which can allow malicious code to bypass detection when it is installed, copied, or executed.

Como os atacantes a exploram

Trajeto do atacante passo a passo

  1. 1

    Identificar um caminho de código que trata input não confiável sem validação.

  2. 2

    Criar um payload que explora o comportamento inseguro — injeção, traversal, overflow ou abuso de lógica.

  3. 3

    Entregar o payload através de um pedido normal e observar a reação da aplicação.

  4. 4

    Iterar até que a resposta exponha dados, execute código do atacante ou escale privilégios.

Exemplo de código vulnerável

Vulnerable pseudo

A MITRE não publicou um exemplo de código para este CWE. O padrão abaixo é ilustrativo — consulte os Recursos para referências canónicas.

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

Secure pseudo

Seguro 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.
Lista de verificação de prevenção

How to prevent CWE-67

  • Implementation Be familiar with the device names in the operating system where your system is deployed. Check input for these device names.
Sinais de deteção

How to detect CWE-67

SAST High

Executar análise estática (SAST) na base de código à procura do padrão inseguro no fluxo de dados.

DAST Moderate

Executar testes dinâmicos de segurança de aplicações (DAST) contra o endpoint em execução.

Runtime Moderate

Monitorizar os registos em tempo de execução para traços de exceção invulgares, input malformado ou tentativas de contornar a autorização.

Code review Moderate

Revisão de código: sinalizar qualquer novo código que trate input desta superfície sem usar os ajudantes validados do framework.

CWE-67

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.

Perguntas frequentes

Frequently asked questions

O que é o CWE-67?

This vulnerability occurs when an application builds file paths from user input but fails to properly recognize or handle Windows reserved device names like AUX, CON, or COM1. Attackers can exploit this by submitting these special names, which typically causes the application to crash, hang, or leak sensitive information when it tries to access them as regular files.

Qual a gravidade do CWE-67?

A MITRE classifica a probabilidade de exploração como Alta — esta fraqueza é ativamente explorada em campo e deve ser priorizada para remediação.

Que linguagens ou plataformas são afetadas pelo CWE-67?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: Windows.

Como posso prevenir o CWE-67?

Be familiar with the device names in the operating system where your system is deployed. Check input for these device names.

Como é que o Plexicus deteta e corrige o CWE-67?

O motor SAST do Plexicus correlaciona a assinatura de fluxo de dados do CWE-67 em cada commit. Quando é encontrada uma correspondência, o nosso agente Codex Remedium abre um PR de correção com o código corrigido, testes e um resumo de uma linha para o revisor.

Onde posso saber mais sobre o CWE-67?

A MITRE publica a definição canónica em https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/67.html. Pode também consultar a documentação da OWASP e do NIST para orientações adjacentes.

Pronto para validar o que importa?

Pronto para validar o que importa.

O Plexicus é Proof-Driven AppSec: achados validados, compreensão contextual e remediação revisada — ancorada em evidência, escopada com você.

Qualificação

Verifique se o AI Swarm Pentest se adequa ao seu ambiente.

Partilhe o contexto mínimo. Vamos rever o escopo e indicar o próximo passo comercial.

Antes de enviar — verifique se se encaixa

0 / 280

Sem compromisso. Se não se encaixa, dizemos.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorized target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)
Ronda privada Para investidores