The product uses external input to construct a pathname that should be within a restricted directory, but it does not properly neutralize '....//' (doubled dot dot slash) sequences that can resolve to a location that is outside of that directory.

What CVEs are caused by CWE-34?

1 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-34, including CVE-2023-41629.

How is CWE-34 detected?

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code: According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

What are the consequences of CWE-34?

Exploiting CWE-34 can lead to: Read Files or Directories, Modify Files or Directories.

Is CWE-34 actively exploited?

1 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-34; none are currently in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws.

CWE-34: Path Traversal: '....//'

RadicalNotion.AI

Implementation

Input Validation

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.

When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434.

Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the "../" string.

Effectiveness: High

Implementation

Input Validation

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.

CWE-34: Path Traversal: '....//'

Overview

Real-world CVEs

Common consequences

How it happens

When it is introduced

How to prevent it

How to detect it

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

Architecture or Design Review

Illustrative examples

Terminology & mappings

Mapped taxonomies

Frequently asked questions

References

Stay ahead of CWE-34

Overview

Real-world CVEs

Common consequences

How it happens

When it is introduced

How to prevent it

How to detect it

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

Architecture or Design Review

Illustrative examples

Related weaknesses

Parent

Related

Terminology & mappings

Mapped taxonomies

Frequently asked questions

References

Stay ahead of CWE-34