OpenControls Logo

STIG Viewer

STIGViewer Support

The application must not be vulnerable to overflow attacks.

Overview

Finding IDVersionRule IDIA ControlsSeverity
V-222612APSC-DV-002590SV-222612r961665_ruleCCI-002824high
Description
A buffer overflow occurs when a program exceeds the amount of data allocated to a buffer. The buffer is a sequential section of memory and when the data is written outside the memory bounds, the program can crash or malicious code can be executed. Security safeguards employed to protect memory include, for example, data execution prevention and address space layout randomization. Data execution prevention safeguards can either be hardware-enforced or software-enforced with hardware providing the greater strength of mechanism. Buffer overflows can manifest as stack overflows, heap overflows integer overflows and format string overflows. Each type of overflow is dependent upon the underlying application language and the context in which the overflow is executed. Integer overflows can lead to infinite looping when loop index variables are compromised and cause a denial of service. If the integer is used in data references, the data can become corrupt. Also, using the integer in memory allocation can cause buffer overflows, and a denial of service. Integers used in access control mechanisms can potentially trigger buffer overflows, which can be used to execute arbitrary code. Almost all known web servers, application servers, and web application environments are susceptible to buffer overflows. Proper validation of user input is required to mitigate the risk. Notably, limiting the size of the strings a user is allowed to input to a program to a predetermined, acceptable length. A code review, static code analysis or active vulnerability or fuzz testing are methods used to identify overflows within application code.
STIGDate
Application Security and Development Security Technical Implementation Guide2025-09-09

Related Frameworks

1 mapping across 4 frameworks
SCF0 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 3 hops (5) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

CFG-02Secure Baseline Configurations
1.00
CRY-01Use of Cryptographic Controls
1.00
DCH-01Data Protection
1.00
IAC-21Least Privilege
1.00
SEA-10Memory Protection
1.00
NIST 800-530 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 2 hops (14) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

AC-6(10)Prohibit Non-privileged Users from Executing Privileged Functions
1.00
AU-12Audit Record Generation
1.00
AU-3(1)Additional Audit Information
1.00
CM-6Configuration Settings
1.00
CM-7Least Functionality
1.00
CM-7(2)Prevent Program Execution
1.00
SC-2Separation of System and User Functionality
1.00
SC-3Security Function Isolation
1.00
SC-39Process Isolation
1.00
SC-5Denial-of-service Protection
1.00

+4 more (top 10 by confidence shown)

CCI1 mapping
CCI-002824
1.00
NIST CSF 2.00 mappings

No source states a mapping between these directly.

Also reachable in 3 hops (1) derived by us, not asserted by any source

Each of these is a route we composed by chaining published mappings. No publisher states a relationship between the two endpoints.

PR.DS-10
1.00

Who does this work

7 NICE work roles and 7 EC-Council certifications.

This is an inference across published mappings, not a single claim by anyone. This check maps to a control, which maps to a Cybersecurity Framework outcome, which NIST assigns to the work roles below. EC-Council separately maps its certifications to those same roles.

A certification prepares someone for a role. It is not evidence that a holder is qualified, and neither NIST nor EC-Council has stated that any certification here addresses this check.

Work-role assignments published by NIST (NICE Framework Components 2.2.0 and the CSF 2.0 OLIR crosswalk). Certification mappings published by EC-Council.

Details

Check Text (C-222612r961665_chk)

Review the application documentation and architecture. Interview the application admin and identify the most recent code testing and analysis that has been conducted. Review the test results; verify configuration of analysis tools are set to check for the existence of overflows. This includes but is not limited to buffer overflows, stack overflows, heap overflows, integer overflows and format string overflows. If overflows are identified in the test results, verify the latest test results are being used, if not, ensure remediation has been completed. If the test results show overflows exist and no remediation evidence is presented, or if test results are not available, this is a finding.

Fix Text (F-36218r864579_fix)

Design the application to use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking. Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Use compiler-based canary mechanisms such as StackGuard, ProPolice, and the Microsoft Visual Studio/GS flag. Use OS-level preventative functionality and control user input validation. Patch applications when overflows are identified in vendor products.