CWE · MITRE source
CWE-130Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency
The product parses a formatted message or structure, but it does not handle or incorrectly handles a length field that is inconsistent with the actual length of the associated data.
If an attacker can manipulate the length parameter associated with an input such that it is inconsistent with the actual length of the input, this can be leveraged to cause the target application to behave in unexpected, and possibly, malicious ways. One of the possible motives for doing so is to pass in arbitrarily large input to the application. Another possible motivation is the modification of application state by including invalid data for subsequent properties of the application. Such weaknesses commonly lead to attacks such as buffer overflows and execution of arbitrary code.
Last updated: 04 July 2026 00:28 UTC
Cumulative inbound coverage
How completely the frameworks we cross-walk collectively cover this — the verdict is the strongest single mapping (overlapping partials are not summed); breadth shows the corroboration behind it.
Collective: mostly · 8 mapping(s) from 4 framework(s): ATT&CK 4 (partial) · ASVS 5.0 2 (mostly) · CAPEC 1 (partial) · OWASP-Web 1 (partial)
NIST 800-53 r5 controls that address this weakness (0)AI
| Control | Title | Family | Why it addresses this CWE |
|---|---|---|---|
| No NIST controls proposed yet. | |||
MITRE ATT&CK techniques this weakness enables
Our own two-way CWE↔ATT&CK cross-walk — a direct mapping with no public source (the CWE→CAPEC→ATT&CK chain leaves most top weaknesses, incl. XSS and SQLi, mapped to nothing). Drafted by Grok and spot-checked by Claude Opus 4.8.
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial).
Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority
| CVE | Risk | CVSS | EPSS | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2025-14847 KEV | 10.0 | 7.5 | 0.8301 | 2025-12-19 |
CVE-2022-2714 | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0074 | 2022-09-06 |
CVE-2026-41898 | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0041 | 2026-04-24 |
CVE-2026-43125 UPD | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0043 | 2026-05-06 |
CVE-2026-42216 UPD | 7.0 | 9.1 | 0.0035 | 2026-05-07 |
CVE-2021-35516 | 6.0 | 7.5 | 0.1270 | 2021-07-13 |
CVE-2021-35517 | 6.0 | 7.5 | 0.1090 | 2021-07-13 |
CVE-2021-36090 | 6.0 | 7.5 | 0.1329 | 2021-07-13 |
CVE-2024-39614 | 6.0 | 7.5 | 0.2864 | 2024-07-10 |
CVE-2018-5453 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0120 | 2018-03-05 |
CVE-2019-3862 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0811 | 2019-03-21 |
CVE-2019-0055 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0135 | 2019-10-09 |
CVE-2021-20588 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0586 | 2021-02-19 |
CVE-2021-20610 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0308 | 2021-12-01 |
CVE-2022-24666 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0135 | 2022-02-09 |
CVE-2022-0618 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0125 | 2022-03-10 |
CVE-2021-43666 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0221 | 2022-03-24 |
CVE-2022-0677 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0123 | 2022-04-07 |
CVE-2022-1543 | 5.5 | 8.8 | 0.0106 | 2022-04-29 |
CVE-2021-38445 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0258 | 2022-05-05 |
CVE-2022-3272 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0139 | 2022-09-26 |
CVE-2022-3290 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0070 | 2022-09-26 |
CVE-2022-20870 | 5.5 | 8.6 | 0.0084 | 2022-10-10 |
CVE-2022-41586 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0042 | 2022-10-14 |
CVE-2023-28964 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0064 | 2023-04-17 |