Weakness ID: 91
Vulnerability Mapping: ALLOWED This CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review (with careful review of mapping notes)Abstraction: Base Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
Description
The product does not properly neutralize special elements that are used in XML, allowing attackers to modify the syntax, content, or commands of the XML before it is processed by an end system.
Extended Description
Within XML, special elements could include reserved words or characters such as "<", ">", """, and "&", which could then be used to add new data or modify XML syntax.
Common Consequences
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
| Impact | Details |
|---|---|
|
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Read Application Data; Modify Application Data |
Scope: Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability |
Potential Mitigations
| Phase(s) | Mitigation |
|---|---|
|
Implementation |
Strategy: 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. |
Relationships
This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this
weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to
similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition,
relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user
may want to explore.
Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (View-1000)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChildOf |
Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource.
|
74 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') |
| ParentOf |
Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
|
643 | Improper Neutralization of Data within XPath Expressions ('XPath Injection') |
| ParentOf |
Base - a weakness that is still mostly independent of a resource or technology, but with sufficient details to provide specific methods for detection and prevention. Base level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 2 or 3 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, technology, language, and resource.
|
652 | Improper Neutralization of Data within XQuery Expressions ('XQuery Injection') |
Relevant to the view "Software Development" (View-699)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| MemberOf |
Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic.
|
137 | Data Neutralization Issues |
Relevant to the view "Weaknesses for Simplified Mapping of Published Vulnerabilities" (View-1003)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChildOf |
Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource.
|
74 | Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') |
Relevant to the view "Architectural Concepts" (View-1008)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| MemberOf |
Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic.
|
1019 | Validate Inputs |
Modes
Of Introduction
The different Modes of Introduction provide information
about how and when this
weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which
introduction
may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the
given
phase.
| Phase | Note |
|---|---|
| Implementation | REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic. |
Applicable Platforms
This listing shows possible areas for which the given
weakness could appear. These
may be for specific named Languages, Operating Systems, Architectures, Paradigms,
Technologies,
or a class of such platforms. The platform is listed along with how frequently the given
weakness appears for that instance.
| Languages |
Class: Not Language-Specific (Undetermined Prevalence) |
Weakness Ordinalities
| Ordinality | Description |
|---|---|
|
Primary |
(where the weakness exists independent of other weaknesses) |
Detection
Methods
| Method | Details |
|---|---|
|
Automated Static Analysis |
Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.) Effectiveness: High |
Memberships
This MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that
reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a
weakness fits within the context of external information sources.
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
713 | OWASP Top Ten 2007 Category A2 - Injection Flaws |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
727 | OWASP Top Ten 2004 Category A6 - Injection Flaws |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
810 | OWASP Top Ten 2010 Category A1 - Injection |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
929 | OWASP Top Ten 2013 Category A1 - Injection |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
990 | SFP Secondary Cluster: Tainted Input to Command |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
1027 | OWASP Top Ten 2017 Category A1 - Injection |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
1308 | CISQ Quality Measures - Security |
| MemberOf |  View - a subset of CWE entries that provides a way of examining CWE content. The two main view structures are Slices (flat lists) and Graphs (containing relationships between entries). |
1340 | CISQ Data Protection Measures |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
1347 | OWASP Top Ten 2021 Category A03:2021 - Injection |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
1409 | Comprehensive Categorization: Injection |
| MemberOf | Category - a CWE entry that contains a set of other entries that share a common characteristic. |
1440 | OWASP Top Ten 2025 Category A05:2025 - Injection |
Vulnerability Mapping Notes
| Usage |
ALLOWED-WITH-REVIEW
(this CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review) |
||||
| Reason | Acceptable-Use | ||||
|
Rationale |
This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities. | ||||
|
Comments |
This weakness might be confused with other weaknesses such as XXE. Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction. | ||||
|
Suggestions |
|
Notes
Theoretical
In vulnerability theory terms, this is a representation-specific case of a Data/Directive Boundary Error.
Research Gap
Under-reported. This is likely found regularly by third party code auditors, but there are very few publicly reported examples.
Maintenance
The description for this entry is generally applicable to XML, but the name includes "blind XPath injection" which is more closely associated with CWE-643. Therefore this entry might need to be deprecated or converted to a general category - although injection into raw XML is not covered by CWE-643 or CWE-652.
Taxonomy
Mappings
| Mapped Taxonomy Name | Node ID | Fit | Mapped Node Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLOVER | XML injection (aka Blind Xpath injection) | ||
| OWASP Top Ten 2007 | A2 | CWE More Specific | Injection Flaws |
| OWASP Top Ten 2004 | A6 | CWE More Specific | Injection Flaws |
| WASC | 23 | XML Injection | |
| Software Fault Patterns | SFP24 | Tainted input to command |
References
Content
History
| Submissions |
||
|---|---|---|
| Submission Date | Submitter | Organization |
|
2006-07-19
(CWE Draft 3, 2006-07-19) |
PLOVER | |
 Modifications |
||
| Modification Date | Modifier | Organization |
|
2026-04-30
(CWE 4.20, 2026-04-30) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Mapping_Notes | ||
|
2025-12-11
(CWE 4.19, 2025-12-11) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships, Weakness_Ordinalities | ||
|
2023-06-29
(CWE 4.12, 2023-06-29) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Mapping_Notes | ||
|
2023-04-27
(CWE 4.11, 2023-04-27) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Detection_Factors, References, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction | ||
|
2023-01-31
(CWE 4.10, 2023-01-31) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Description | ||
|
2021-10-28
(CWE 4.6, 2021-10-28) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2020-12-10
(CWE 4.3, 2020-12-10) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2020-08-20
(CWE 4.2, 2020-08-20) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2020-06-25
(CWE 4.1, 2020-06-25) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Potential_Mitigations | ||
|
2020-02-24
(CWE 4.0, 2020-02-24) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Potential_Mitigations, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships | ||
|
2019-06-20
(CWE 3.3, 2019-06-20) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Related_Attack_Patterns | ||
|
2018-03-27
(CWE 3.1, 2018-03-27) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2017-11-08
(CWE 3.0, 2017-11-08) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Applicable_Platforms, Modes_of_Introduction, References, Relationships | ||
|
2015-12-07
(CWE 2.9, 2015-12-07) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2014-07-30
(CWE 2.8, 2014-07-31) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | ||
|
2014-06-23
(CWE 2.7, 2014-06-23) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships | ||
|
2014-02-18
(CWE 2.6, 2014-02-19) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Related_Attack_Patterns | ||
|
2012-10-30
(CWE 2.3, 2012-10-30) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Potential_Mitigations | ||
|
2012-05-11
(CWE 2.2, 2012-05-15) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated References, Relationships | ||
|
2011-06-01
(CWE 1.13, 2011-06-01) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Common_Consequences | ||
|
2010-06-21
(CWE 1.9, 2010-06-21) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Description, Relationships | ||
|
2010-02-16
(CWE 1.8, 2010-02-16) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Taxonomy_Mappings | ||
|
2008-10-14
(CWE 1.0.1, 2008-10-14) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Maintenance_Notes, Other_Notes, Theoretical_Notes | ||
|
2008-09-08
(CWE 1.0, 2008-09-09) |
CWE Content Team | MITRE |
| updated Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings | ||
|
2008-08-15
(CWE 1.0, 2008-09-09) |
Veracode | |
| Suggested OWASP Top Ten 2004 mapping | ||
|
2008-07-01
(CWE 1.0, 2008-09-09) |
Eric Dalci | Cigital |
| updated Time_of_Introduction | ||