CVE-2023-32695

Security testing and evaluation at multiple SDLC stages directly detects missing or flawed input validation, with the required remediation process ensuring fixes are applied.

Requires detection and response to audit logging failures as an unusual or exceptional condition.

Implements detection of unusual or exceptional conditions followed by safe mode entry, reducing the window for exploitation of unchecked conditions.

Training ensures users perform required checks for unusual or exceptional conditions as part of contingency roles, limiting attacker leverage from skipped validations.

IR testing directly validates checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that could indicate security incidents.

Security testing and developer training directly verify and enforce proper input validation, reducing exploitability of injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

Requires ongoing monitoring of organization-defined metrics and analysis, enabling checks for unusual or exceptional conditions.

Requires detection of unusual conditions followed by a controlled transition to the defined failure state.

Logging can record unhandled exceptions but does not prevent the weakness itself.

Monitoring may detect symptoms of unhandled conditions but does not eliminate the root weakness.

A.8.25 mandates security requirements, secure coding guidelines, checkpoints, testing (incl. code scans) and developer training in the SDLC, which reaches a slice of input validation defects but leaves the majority (incomplete enforcement, second-order inputs, parser differentials, post-validation canonicalization) unaddressed as in the SA-3 and A.8.28 anchors.

Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.

Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.