CWE · MITRE source
CWE-195Signed to Unsigned Conversion Error
The product uses a signed primitive and performs a cast to an unsigned primitive, which can produce an unexpected value if the value of the signed primitive can not be represented using an unsigned primitive.
It is dangerous to rely on implicit casts between signed and unsigned numbers because the result can take on an unexpected value and violate assumptions made by the program. Often, functions will return negative values to indicate a failure. When the result of a function is to be used as a size parameter, using these negative return values can have unexpected results. For example, if negative size values are passed to the standard memory copy or allocation functions they will be implicitly cast to a large unsigned value. This may lead to an exploitable buffer overflow or underflow condition.
Last updated: 15 October 2026 14:21 UTC
Control responseHuman-reviewed
Answering this weakness across the control lifecycle, from our framework cross-walks.
NIST 800-53 r5 controls PROPOSED for this weakness (0)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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No NIST controls proposed yet. | |||
Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority
| CVE | Risk | CVSS | EPSS | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2022-43663 UPD | 7.2 | 8.1 | 0.1404 | 2023-03-20 |
CVE-2011-3045 UPD | 7.1 | 8.8 | 0.0353 | 2012-03-22 |
CVE-2026-49840 UPD | 6.9 | 9.1 | 0.0049 | 2026-06-09 |
CVE-2020-6096 UPD | 6.8 | 8.1 | 0.0548 | 2020-04-01 |
CVE-2025-49847 UPD | 6.6 | 8.8 | 0.0052 | 2025-06-17 |
CVE-2016-6560 UPD | 6.5 | 8.6 | 0.0168 | 2017-03-31 |
CVE-2020-1913 UPD | 6.4 | 8.1 | 0.0120 | 2020-09-09 |
CVE-2024-25388 UPD | 6.2 | 8.4 | 0.0033 | 2024-03-27 |
CVE-2026-74220 | 6.2 | 8.2 | 0.0034 | 2026-09-29 |
CVE-2026-74221 | 6.2 | 8.2 | 0.0034 | 2026-09-29 |
CVE-2025-52566 UPD | 6.0 | 8.6 | 0.0036 | 2025-06-24 |
CVE-2026-85441 UPD | 5.9 | 7.5 | 0.0066 | 2026-09-03 |
CVE-2026-17507 UPD | 5.8 | 7.5 | 0.0034 | 2026-10-02 |
CVE-2025-65495 UPD | 5.7 | 7.5 | 0.0024 | 2025-11-24 |
CVE-2026-55737 UPD | 5.7 | 7.5 | 0.0029 | 2026-07-27 |
CVE-2023-33034 UPD | 5.5 | 7.8 | 0.0012 | 2023-10-03 |
CVE-2023-5184 UPD | 5.1 | 7.0 | 0.0042 | 2023-09-27 |
CVE-2026-26981 | 5.1 | 6.5 | 0.0051 | 2026-02-24 |
CVE-2025-30646 UPD | 5.0 | 6.5 | 0.0024 | 2025-04-09 |
CVE-2026-20248 | 5.0 | 6.8 | 0.0034 | 2026-09-16 |
CVE-2026-102639 | 5.0 | 6.5 | 0.0032 | 2026-09-29 |
CVE-2026-101937 | 5.0 | 6.5 | 0.0027 | 2026-10-14 |
CVE-2023-3635 UPD | 4.9 | 5.9 | 0.0125 | 2023-07-12 |
CVE-2023-28063 UPD | 4.9 | 6.7 | 0.0016 | 2024-02-06 |
CVE-2026-18444 UPD | 4.8 | 6.6 | 0.0013 | 2026-08-25 |