CWE · MITRE source
CWE-662Improper Synchronization
The product utilizes multiple threads, processes, components, or systems to allow temporary access to a shared resource that can only be exclusive to one process at a time, but it does not properly synchronize these actions, which might cause simultaneous accesses of this resource by multiple threads or processes.
Synchronization refers to a variety of behaviors and mechanisms that allow two or more independently-operating processes or threads to ensure that they operate on shared resources in predictable ways that do not interfere with each other. Some shared resource operations cannot be executed atomically; that is, multiple steps must be guaranteed to execute sequentially, without any interference by other processes. Synchronization mechanisms vary widely, but they may include locking, mutexes, and semaphores. When a multi-step operation on a shared resource cannot be guaranteed to execute independent of interference, then the resulting behavior can be unpredictable. Improper synchronization could lead to data or memory corruption, denial of service, etc.
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: full · 9 mapping(s) from 3 framework(s): CAPEC 4 (partial) · ASVS 5.0 3 (full) · ATT&CK 2 (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-2018-15555 | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0297 | 2019-06-28 |
CVE-2024-32644 | 7.0 | 9.1 | 0.0094 | 2024-04-19 |
CVE-2020-7457 | 6.0 | 8.1 | 0.3298 | 2020-07-09 |
CVE-2016-8368 | 5.5 | 8.6 | 0.0261 | 2017-02-13 |
CVE-2019-5675 | 5.5 | 7.8 | 0.0038 | 2019-05-10 |
CVE-2018-4027 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0174 | 2019-05-13 |
CVE-2019-16137 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0142 | 2019-09-09 |
CVE-2019-19577 | 5.5 | 7.2 | 0.0050 | 2019-12-11 |
CVE-2019-17185 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0217 | 2020-03-21 |
CVE-2020-13759 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0160 | 2020-06-02 |
CVE-2020-14098 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0122 | 2021-01-13 |
CVE-2020-36206 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0029 | 2021-01-26 |
CVE-2020-36207 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0029 | 2021-01-26 |
CVE-2020-36208 | 5.5 | 7.8 | 0.0043 | 2021-01-26 |
CVE-2020-36211 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0034 | 2021-01-26 |
CVE-2020-36215 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0136 | 2021-01-26 |
CVE-2020-25668 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0103 | 2021-05-26 |
CVE-2021-20592 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0150 | 2021-08-05 |
CVE-2022-1931 | 5.5 | 8.1 | 0.0195 | 2022-05-31 |
CVE-2022-2962 | 5.5 | 7.8 | 0.0041 | 2022-09-13 |
CVE-2022-23005 | 5.5 | 8.7 | 0.0082 | 2023-01-23 |
CVE-2023-2801 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0075 | 2023-06-06 |
CVE-2023-45084 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 0.0022 | 2023-12-05 |
CVE-2024-7409 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0103 | 2024-08-05 |
CVE-2025-27104 | 5.5 | 7.5 | 0.0041 | 2025-02-21 |