The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.

What CVEs are caused by CWE-352?

9,421 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-352, including CVE-2023-2533, CVE-2016-6277, CVE-2020-10181. 5 are listed in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.

Is CWE-352 part of the OWASP Top 10?

CWE-352 maps to OWASP Top Ten 2007: Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (A5) in the OWASP security taxonomy.

Is CWE-352 actively exploited?

Yes. 5 CWE-352 vulnerabilities are in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws, out of 9,421 recorded CVEs.

CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (Session Riding)

Overview

CWE-352 (Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)) is a compound-level software weakness catalogued by MITRE in the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE). It describes a recurring type of mistake that can lead to exploitable security vulnerabilities.

Real-world CVEs

9,421 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-352 (Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)), including 5 in CISA's KEV (Known Exploited Vulnerabilities) catalog. KEVs are shown first. 951 new CWE-352 CVEs have been recorded so far in 2026 (1,892 in 2025).

Showing 12 of 9,421 recorded CWE-352 CVEs. Get an alert for each new one, with AI-written analysis and fixes.

Monitor CWE-352 vulnerabilities

Common consequences

What can happen when CWE-352 is exploited.

Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Affects: Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability, Non-Repudiation, Access Control

The consequences will vary depending on the nature of the functionality that is vulnerable to CSRF. An attacker could trick a client into making an unintentional request to the web server via a URL, image load, XMLHttpRequest, etc., which would then be treated as an authentic request from the client - effectively performing any operations as the victim, leading to an exposure of data, unintended code execution, etc. If the victim is an administrator or privileged user, the consequences may include obtaining complete control over the web application - deleting or stealing data, uninstalling the product, or using it to launch other attacks against all of the product's users. Because the attacker has the identity of the victim, the scope of CSRF is limited only by the victim's privileges.

How it happens

When it is introduced

Typically introduced during these phases of the software lifecycle.

Architecture and Design

Applies to

Technologies

Web Based

Web Server

How to prevent it

Practical mitigations for CWE-352, grouped by where in the lifecycle they apply.

Architecture and Design

Libraries or Frameworks

Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].

For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]

Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]

Implementation

Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.

Architecture and Design

Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]

Architecture and Design

Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.

How to detect it

Manual Analysis

This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.

Specifically, manual analysis can be useful for finding this weakness, and for minimizing false positives assuming an understanding of business logic. However, it might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. For black-box analysis, if credentials are not known for privileged accounts, then the most security-critical portions of the application may not receive sufficient attention.

Consider using OWASP CSRFTester to identify potential issues and aid in manual analysis.

Effectiveness: High

Automated Static Analysis

CSRF is currently difficult to detect reliably using automated techniques. This is because each application has its own implicit security policy that dictates which requests can be influenced by an outsider and automatically performed on behalf of a user, versus which requests require strong confidence that the user intends to make the request. For example, a keyword search of the public portion of a web site is typically expected to be encoded within a link that can be launched automatically when the user clicks on the link.

Effectiveness: Limited

Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Code examples

MITRE examples of the weakness in code.

This example PHP code attempts to secure the form submission process by validating that the user submitting the form has a valid session. A CSRF attack would not be prevented by this countermeasure because the attacker forges a request through the user's web browser in which a valid session already exists.

Vulnerable example

xml

<form action="/url/profile.php" method="post">

Vulnerable example

php

// initiate the session in order to validate sessions

Attack input

xml

<SCRIPT>

Illustrative examples

Real CVEs that MITRE cites as examples of this weakness.

CVE-2004-1703 — Add user accounts via a URL in an img tag
CVE-2004-1995 — Add user accounts via a URL in an img tag
CVE-2004-1967 — Arbitrary code execution by specifying the code in a crafted img tag or URL
CVE-2004-1842 — Gain administrative privileges via a URL in an img tag
CVE-2005-1947 — Delete a victim's information via a URL or an img tag
CVE-2005-2059 — Change another user's settings via a URL or an img tag
CVE-2005-1674 — Perform actions as administrator via a URL or an img tag
CVE-2009-3520 — modify password for the administrator
CVE-2009-3022

Parent, child, and peer weaknesses in the CWE hierarchy.

Parent

CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

Peer

CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

Requires

Terminology & mappings

Alternate terms

Session Riding
Cross Site Reference Forgery
XSRF
CSRF

Mapped taxonomies

PLOVER: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
OWASP Top Ten 2007: Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (A5) — Exact fit
WASC: Cross-site Request Forgery (9)

Attack patterns

CAPEC attack patterns that exploit this weakness.

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about CWE-352.

What is CWE-352?: The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
What CVEs are caused by CWE-352?: 9,421 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-352, including CVE-2023-2533, CVE-2016-6277, CVE-2020-10181. 5 are listed in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.
Is CWE-352 part of the OWASP Top 10?: CWE-352 maps to OWASP Top Ten 2007: Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (A5) in the OWASP security taxonomy.
How do you prevent CWE-352?: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
How is CWE-352 detected?: Manual Analysis: This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.
What are the consequences of CWE-352?: Exploiting CWE-352 can lead to: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Bypass Protection Mechanism, Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart.
Is CWE-352 actively exploited?: Yes. 5 CWE-352 vulnerabilities are in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws, out of 9,421 recorded CVEs.

References

Weakness data is sourced from the MITRE CWE catalog (v4.20). CVE associations are aggregated and kept current by RadicalNotion.AI.

CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Overview

Real-world CVEs

Common consequences

How it happens

When it is introduced

Applies to

How to prevent it

How to detect it

Manual Analysis

Automated Static Analysis

Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

Code examples

Illustrative examples

Terminology & mappings

Alternate terms

Mapped taxonomies

Attack patterns

Frequently asked questions

References

Track CWE-352 CVEs

Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation

Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation

Manual Static Analysis - Source Code

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

Architecture or Design Review

Overview

Real-world CVEs

Common consequences

How it happens

When it is introduced

Applies to

How to prevent it

How to detect it

Manual Analysis

Automated Static Analysis

Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

Code examples

Illustrative examples

Related weaknesses

Parent

Peer

Requires

Related

Terminology & mappings

Alternate terms

Mapped taxonomies

Attack patterns

Frequently asked questions

References

Track CWE-352 CVEs

Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation

Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation

Manual Static Analysis - Source Code

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

Architecture or Design Review