Skip to content
OpenAdvisories

Weakness (CWE)

CWE-494: Download of Code Without Integrity Check

Base Draft

The product downloads source code or an executable from a remote location and executes the code without sufficiently verifying the origin and integrity of the code.

How to prevent it (5 mitigations)

  1. Implementation

    Perform proper forward and reverse DNS lookups to detect DNS spoofing.

  2. Architecture and Design, Operation

    Encrypt the code with a reliable encryption scheme before transmitting.

  3. Architecture and Design

    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].

    Speficially, it may be helpful to use tools or frameworks to perform integrity checking on the transmitted code.

    - When providing the code that is to be downloaded, such as for automatic updates of the software, then use cryptographic signatures for the code and modify the download clients to verify the signatures. Ensure that the implementation does not contain CWE-295, CWE-320, CWE-347, and related weaknesses.

    - Use code signing technologies such as Authenticode. See references [REF-454] [REF-455] [REF-456].

  4. Architecture and Design, Operation

    Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.

  5. Architecture and Design, Operation

    Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.

    OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.

    This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.

    Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

Source: MITRE CWE-494

All Critical High Medium Low Exploited only Public exploit

2 results · Clear filters · Feed

  • Medium 6.6
    CVE-2025-65855 Public exploit

    The OTA firmware update mechanism in Netun Solutions HelpFlash IoT (firmware v18_178_221102_ASCII_PRO_1R5_50) uses hard…

  • Medium 4.3
    CVE-2023-29401 Public exploit

    Improper handling of filenames in Content-Disposition HTTP header in github.com/gin-gonic/gin

    The filename parameter of the Context.FileAttachment function is not properly sanitized. A maliciously crafted filename can cause the Content-Disposition header to be sent with an unexpected filename value or otherwise modify the Content-Disposition header. F…

    github.com/gin-gonic/gin github.com/gin-gonic/gin github.com/gin-gonic/gin golang-github-gin-gonic-gin Debian Ubuntu Go