CWE · MITRE source
CWE-488Exposure of Data Element to Wrong Session
The product does not sufficiently enforce boundaries between the states of different sessions, causing data to be provided to, or used by, the wrong session.
Data can "bleed" from one session to another through member variables of singleton objects, such as Servlets, and objects from a shared pool. In the case of Servlets, developers sometimes do not understand that, unless a Servlet implements the SingleThreadModel interface, the Servlet is a singleton; there is only one instance of the Servlet, and that single instance is used and re-used to handle multiple requests that are processed simultaneously by different threads. A common result is that developers use Servlet member fields in such a way that one user may inadvertently see another user's data. In other words, storing user data in Servlet member fields introduces a data access race condition.
Last updated: 14 October 2026 20:41 UTC
Control responseHuman-reviewed
Answering this weakness across the control lifecycle, from our framework cross-walks.
PR.AA-05PR.DS-10PR.IR-01SC-4Information in Shared System Resources
—
—
—
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-2026-16498 | 7.4 | 10.0 | 0.0046 | 2026-07-28 |
CVE-2026-16326 | 7.4 | 10.0 | 0.0054 | 2026-07-29 |
CVE-2026-19931 UPD | 7.4 | 9.8 | 0.0075 | 2026-09-06 |
CVE-2024-27455 UPD | 6.9 | 9.1 | 0.0064 | 2024-02-26 |
CVE-2025-47928 UPD | 6.9 | 9.1 | 0.0063 | 2025-05-15 |
CVE-2024-38367 UPD | 6.8 | 8.2 | 0.1113 | 2024-07-01 |
CVE-2025-1247 UPD | 6.4 | 8.3 | 0.0082 | 2025-02-13 |
CVE-2026-86492 | 6.3 | 8.5 | 0.0090 | 2026-09-07 |
CVE-2024-6162 UPD | 6.2 | 7.5 | 0.0170 | 2024-06-20 |
CVE-2026-80231 UPD | 6.0 | 7.5 | 0.0090 | 2026-09-06 |
CVE-2023-6519 UPD | 5.9 | 7.5 | 0.0051 | 2024-02-08 |
CVE-2024-5148 UPD | 5.9 | 7.5 | 0.0057 | 2024-09-02 |
CVE-2026-5773 UPD | 5.9 | 7.5 | 0.0066 | 2026-05-13 |
CVE-2025-30073 UPD | 5.8 | 7.5 | 0.0037 | 2025-03-26 |
CVE-2023-1907 UPD | 5.7 | 8.0 | 0.0045 | 2025-01-09 |
CVE-2026-34391 | 5.7 | 7.5 | 0.0026 | 2026-03-27 |
CVE-2026-82416 | 5.7 | 7.7 | 0.0023 | 2026-10-13 |
CVE-2026-54311 | 5.6 | 7.7 | 0.0039 | 2026-06-23 |
CVE-2024-27935 UPD | 5.5 | 7.2 | 0.0072 | 2024-03-21 |
CVE-2026-18489 UPD | 5.5 | 7.4 | 0.0026 | 2026-09-04 |
CVE-2026-88017 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0023 | 2026-09-10 |
CVE-2024-41977 UPD | 5.4 | 7.1 | 0.0044 | 2024-08-13 |
CVE-2026-54497 UPD | 5.2 | 6.8 | 0.0033 | 2026-07-17 |
CVE-2022-40210 UPD | 5.1 | 6.8 | 0.0020 | 2023-05-10 |
CVE-2026-23646 UPD | 5.1 | 6.5 | 0.0037 | 2026-01-19 |