CWE-119Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

Abstraction: Class · CVEs in our corpus: 14,419

The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary. This may result in read or write operations on unexpected memory locations that could be linked to other variables, data structures, or internal program data.

Last updated: 16 October 2026 00:29 UTC

Control responseHuman-reviewed

Answering this weakness across the control lifecycle, from our framework cross-walks.

Prevent

Stop it (NIST 800-53 / CSF Protect)

SI-16 Memory Protection
SI-4 System Monitoring
SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation
SC-27 Platform-independent Applications

Detect

Catch it (CSF Detect / Respond)

—

Harden

Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate

Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

—

NIST 800-53 r5 controls PROPOSED for this weakness (4)AI-assisted

These are model PROPOSALS, not graded mappings. They come from controls_to_cwe_proposals, which carries no grade field at all; across the CWE pages 1,540 of 1,722 such associations (89%) have never been graded by anything. The heading said “address” until 2026-09-29, which asserted a relationship the data does not carry. Graded cross-walks are on the framework map, not here.

Control	Title	Family	Why it addresses this CWE
`SI-16`	Memory Protection	SI	Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
`SI-4`	System Monitoring	SI	Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
`SA-11`	Developer Testing and Evaluation	SA	Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
`SC-27`	Platform-independent Applications	SC	Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.

Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority

CVE	Risk	CVSS	EPSS	Published
`CVE-2020-0796` KEV	10.0	10.0	0.9981	2020-03-12
`CVE-2008-4250` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.9875	2008-10-23
`CVE-2010-3765` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.8316	2010-10-28
`CVE-2011-1889` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.4902	2011-06-16
`CVE-2016-1287`	9.9	9.8	0.7422	2016-02-11
`CVE-2016-2108`	9.9	9.8	0.7791	2016-05-05
`CVE-2014-3931` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.2898	2017-03-31
`CVE-2017-12240` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.1377	2017-09-29
`CVE-2017-14492`	9.9	9.8	0.9331	2017-10-03
`CVE-2017-14493`	9.9	9.8	0.8364	2017-10-03
`CVE-2017-15944` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.9834	2017-12-11
`CVE-2017-13696`	9.9	9.8	0.7831	2018-01-24
`CVE-2018-6892`	9.9	9.8	0.9339	2018-02-11
`CVE-2018-7584`	9.9	9.8	0.8735	2018-03-01
`CVE-2018-7445` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.6081	2018-03-19
`CVE-2018-0151` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.1420	2018-03-28
`CVE-2018-9059`	9.9	9.8	0.7730	2018-04-20
`CVE-2016-6563`	9.9	9.8	0.7974	2018-07-13
`CVE-2019-1663`	9.9	9.8	0.9571	2019-02-28
`CVE-2020-29557` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.5432	2021-01-29
`CVE-2021-22991` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.6106	2021-03-31
`CVE-2025-31200` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.2090	2025-04-16
`CVE-2025-6543` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.1056	2025-06-25
`CVE-2025-7775` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.2028	2025-08-26
`CVE-2026-8452` KEV	9.9	9.8	0.0101	2026-06-30