CWEweakness
CWE-173 Improper Handling of Alternate Encoding
- Abstraction
- Variant
- Structure
- Simple
- Status
- Draft
- Languages
- Not Language-Specific
- CWE version
- 5.0
Description
The product does not properly handle when an input uses an alternate encoding that is valid for the control sphere to which the input is being sent.
Common consequences
• Access Control: Bypass Protection Mechanism
Potential mitigations
• [Architecture and Design] Avoid making decisions based on names of resources (e.g. files) if those resources can have alternate names.
• [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.
Related
Attack pattern · CAPEC (12)
- CAPEC-120 Double Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-267 Leverage Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-3 Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters attack pattern
- CAPEC-4 Using Alternative IP Address Encodings attack pattern
- CAPEC-52 Embedding NULL Bytes attack pattern
- CAPEC-53 Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash attack pattern
- CAPEC-64 Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
- CAPEC-71 Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
- CAPEC-72 URL Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-78 Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-79 Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-80 Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
Can precede · CWE (1)
- CWE-289 Authentication Bypass by Alternate Name weakness
Child of · CWE (1)
- CWE-172 Improper Encoding or Decoding of Data weakness
Referenced by CAPEC · weakness (12)
- CAPEC-120 Double Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-267 Leverage Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-3 Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters attack pattern
- CAPEC-4 Using Alternative IP Address Encodings attack pattern
- CAPEC-52 Embedding NULL Bytes attack pattern
- CAPEC-53 Postfix, Null Terminate, and Backslash attack pattern
- CAPEC-64 Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
- CAPEC-71 Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
- CAPEC-72 URL Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-78 Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-79 Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding attack pattern
- CAPEC-80 Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic attack pattern
Referenced by CVE · weakness (8)
- CVE-2026-103276 Ghost versions before 6.20.0 contain a file extension filtering bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to read theme… vulnerability
- CVE-2026-81638 Improper Handling of Alternate Encoding vulnerability in ash-project ash_double_entry allows an attacker to submit several distinct string… vulnerability
- CVE-2026-19611 A flaw was found in WildFly Elytron. vulnerability
- CVE-2026-10050 In Eclipse Jetty, the Digest authentication server-side component uses ISO-8859-1 to encode the password as bytes. vulnerability
- CVE-2024-54158 In JetBrains YouTrack before 2024.3.52635 potential spoofing attack was possible via lack of Punycode encoding vulnerability
- CVE-2023-26303 Denial of service could be caused to markdown-it-py, before v2.2.0, if an attacker was allowed to force null assertions with specially… vulnerability
- CVE-2023-26302 Denial of service could be caused to the command line interface of markdown-it-py, before v2.2.0, if an attacker was allowed to use invalid… vulnerability
- CVE-2019-9636 Python 2.7.x through 2.7.16 and 3.x through 3.7.2 is affected by: Improper Handling of Unicode Encoding (with an incorrect netloc) during… vulnerability
Referenced by CWE · has member (1)
- CWE-884 CWE Cross-section view