CWE-168: Improper Handling of Inconsistent Special Elements
The product does not properly handle input in which an inconsistency exists between two or more special characters or reserved words.
Last updated
Overview
An example of this problem would be if paired characters appear in the wrong order, or if the special characters are not properly nested.
Real-world CVEs
2 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-168 (Improper Handling of Inconsistent Special Elements). The highest-severity and most recent are shown first. 1 new CWE-168 CVE has been recorded so far in 2026.
Common consequences
What can happen when CWE-168 is exploited.
DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Hide Activities
Affects: Availability, Access Control, Non-Repudiation
How it happens
When it is introduced
Typically introduced during these phases of the software lifecycle.
How to prevent it
Practical mitigations for CWE-168, grouped by where in the lifecycle they apply.
Developers should anticipate that inconsistent special elements will be injected/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
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.
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.
Terminology & mappings
Mapped taxonomies
- PLOVER: Inconsistent Special Elements
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about CWE-168.
- What is CWE-168?
- The product does not properly handle input in which an inconsistency exists between two or more special characters or reserved words.
- What CVEs are caused by CWE-168?
- 2 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-168, including CVE-2023-36843, CVE-2019-25620.
- How do you prevent CWE-168?
- Developers should anticipate that inconsistent special elements will be injected/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
- What are the consequences of CWE-168?
- Exploiting CWE-168 can lead to: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Hide Activities.
- Is CWE-168 actively exploited?
- 2 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-168; none are currently in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws.
References
- MITRE CWE definition (CWE-168) (opens in a new tab)
- CWE-168 vulnerabilities on NVD (opens in a new tab)
- Learn: What is a CWE?
Weakness data is sourced from the MITRE CWE catalog (v4.20). CVE associations are aggregated and kept current by RadicalNotion.AI.
Stay ahead of CWE-168
Get alerted the moment a new CWE-168 vulnerability affects your stack, with AI-written analysis, severity context, and remediation guidance.