CWE-800: Weaknesses in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most… | Glexia
CWE-800 (Weaknesses in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors) view overview with consequences, detection methods, mitigations, related CVEs…
Glexia's Take · Automated analysis
CWE-800: Weaknesses in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors
Weaknesses in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.
Executive Impact
- Security incident exposure
- Service disruption
- Compliance and remediation cost
Developer Pattern
CWE-800 is the kind of defect developers can usually prevent with explicit validation, safer framework defaults, and tests that exercise hostile input or unsafe state transitions.
Automation confidence
high confidence from CWE-800, 4.20.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Official CWE Definition
CWE-800: Weaknesses in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors
CWE entries in this view (graph) are listed in the 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Programming Errors. This view is considered obsolete as a newer version of the Top 25 is available.
Developer And Remediation Guidance
How teams prevent and detect this weakness
Causes
- Missing validation
- Unsafe defaults
- Insufficient authorization or memory-safety invariant
Remediation
- Use safe APIs
- Centralize the control
- Add regression tests
- Review logs and telemetry for attempted abuse
Detection
- Code review
- SAST
- DAST
- Focused regression tests
Mappings
Related CVEs, CWEs, and ATT&CK context
Related CWEs
No related CWE relationships are published yet.
ATT&CK Relevance
ATT&CK relevance is shown only when reviewed or responsibly inferred.