CWE · MITRE source
CWE-843Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion')
The product allocates or initializes a resource such as a pointer, object, or variable using one type, but it later accesses that resource using a type that is incompatible with the original type.
When the product accesses the resource using an incompatible type, this could trigger logical errors because the resource does not have expected properties. In languages without memory safety, such as C and C++, type confusion can lead to out-of-bounds memory access. While this weakness is frequently associated with unions when parsing data with many different embedded object types in C, it can be present in any application that can interpret the same variable or memory location in multiple ways. This weakness is not unique to C and C++. For example, errors in PHP applications can be triggered by providing array parameters when scalars are expected, or vice versa. Languages such as Perl, which perform automatic conversion of a variable of one type when it is accessed as if it were another type, can also contain these issues.
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 · 8 mapping(s) from 2 framework(s): ATT&CK 5 (mostly) · ASVS 5.0 3 (full)
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-2011-0611 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.9941 | 2011-04-13 |
CVE-2012-0507 KEV | 10.0 | 9.8 | 0.9824 | 2012-06-07 |
CVE-2016-7201 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.7969 | 2016-11-10 |
CVE-2017-0037 KEV | 10.0 | 8.1 | 0.8039 | 2017-02-26 |
CVE-2017-8291 KEV | 10.0 | 7.8 | 0.9697 | 2017-04-27 |
CVE-2017-11292 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.1210 | 2017-10-22 |
CVE-2017-5070 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.3121 | 2017-10-27 |
CVE-2018-8298 KEV | 10.0 | 7.5 | 0.7534 | 2018-07-11 |
CVE-2019-0752 KEV | 10.0 | 7.5 | 0.8155 | 2019-04-09 |
CVE-2019-11707 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.3795 | 2019-07-23 |
CVE-2019-8506 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.1811 | 2019-12-18 |
CVE-2020-6418 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.7881 | 2020-02-27 |
CVE-2019-17026 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.4659 | 2020-03-02 |
CVE-2020-16009 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.4857 | 2020-11-03 |
CVE-2020-27932 KEV | 10.0 | 7.8 | 0.1034 | 2020-12-08 |
CVE-2021-1789 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.1454 | 2021-04-02 |
CVE-2021-21224 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.5774 | 2021-04-26 |
CVE-2021-30551 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.6470 | 2021-06-15 |
CVE-2021-30563 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.0893 | 2021-08-03 |
CVE-2021-30869 KEV | 10.0 | 7.8 | 0.0415 | 2021-08-24 |
CVE-2022-1096 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.2424 | 2022-07-23 |
CVE-2022-1364 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.1372 | 2022-07-26 |
CVE-2022-41033 KEV | 10.0 | 7.8 | 0.0178 | 2022-10-11 |
CVE-2022-3723 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.0675 | 2022-11-01 |
CVE-2022-4262 KEV | 10.0 | 8.8 | 0.1611 | 2022-12-02 |