CWE-129
AllowedImproper Validation of Array Index
Abstraction: Variant · Status: Draft
The product uses untrusted input when calculating or using an array index, but the product does not validate or incorrectly validates the index to ensure the index references a valid position within the array.
746 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-F2HG-GXG7-CFJV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-05 09:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:26Memory corruption due to improper validation of array index in Audio.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-40534"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-09-05T07:15:12Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Memory corruption due to improper validation of array index in Audio.",
"id": "GHSA-f2hg-gxg7-cfjv",
"modified": "2024-04-04T07:26:41Z",
"published": "2023-09-05T09:30:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-40534"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.qualcomm.com/company/product-security/bulletins/september-2023-bulletin"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F5QV-2PWV-6V2V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-19 00:00 – Updated: 2022-04-24 00:00Multiple code execution vulnerabilities exists in the Nef polygon-parsing functionality of CGAL libcgal CGAL-5.1.1. A specially crafted malformed file can lead to an out-of-bounds read and type confusion, which could lead to code execution. An attacker can provide malicious input to trigger any of these vulnerabilities. An oob read vulnerability exists in Nef_2/PM_io_parser.h PM_io_parser::read_hedge() e->set_face().
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-28606"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-125",
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-04-18T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Multiple code execution vulnerabilities exists in the Nef polygon-parsing functionality of CGAL libcgal CGAL-5.1.1. A specially crafted malformed file can lead to an out-of-bounds read and type confusion, which could lead to code execution. An attacker can provide malicious input to trigger any of these vulnerabilities. An oob read vulnerability exists in Nef_2/PM_io_parser.h PM_io_parser\u003cPMDEC\u003e::read_hedge() e-\u003eset_face().",
"id": "GHSA-f5qv-2pwv-6v2v",
"modified": "2022-04-24T00:00:32Z",
"published": "2022-04-19T00:00:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-28606"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2022/12/msg00011.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/202305-34"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2020-1225"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F5W7-CJPW-QQ45
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-28 15:34 – Updated: 2025-06-09 21:30IBM Tivoli Monitoring 6.3.0.7 through 6.3.0.7 Service Pack 19 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper validation of an index value of a dynamically allocated array.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-3357"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-1285",
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-28T15:15:24Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "IBM Tivoli Monitoring 6.3.0.7 through 6.3.0.7 Service Pack 19\u00a0could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper validation of an index value of a dynamically allocated array.",
"id": "GHSA-f5w7-cjpw-qq45",
"modified": "2025-06-09T21:30:44Z",
"published": "2025-05-28T15:34:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-3357"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7234923"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F6PJ-WRQM-MCCQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-01 15:30 – Updated: 2026-05-08 18:31In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Set buffer sampling frequency for accelerometer only
The st_lsm6dsx_hwfifo_odr_store() function, which is called when userspace
writes the buffer sampling frequency sysfs attribute, calls
st_lsm6dsx_check_odr(), which accesses the odr_table array at index
sensor->id; since this array is only 2 entries long, an access for any
sensor type other than accelerometer or gyroscope is an out-of-bounds
access.
The motivation for being able to set a buffer frequency different from the sensor sampling frequency is to support use cases that need accurate event detection (which requires a high sampling frequency) while retrieving sensor data at low frequency. Since all the supported event types are generated from acceleration data only, do not create the buffer sampling frequency attribute for sensor types other than the accelerometer.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-31764"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-01T15:16:39Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\niio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: Set buffer sampling frequency for accelerometer only\n\nThe st_lsm6dsx_hwfifo_odr_store() function, which is called when userspace\nwrites the buffer sampling frequency sysfs attribute, calls\nst_lsm6dsx_check_odr(), which accesses the odr_table array at index\n`sensor-\u003eid`; since this array is only 2 entries long, an access for any\nsensor type other than accelerometer or gyroscope is an out-of-bounds\naccess.\n\nThe motivation for being able to set a buffer frequency different from the\nsensor sampling frequency is to support use cases that need accurate event\ndetection (which requires a high sampling frequency) while retrieving\nsensor data at low frequency. Since all the supported event types are\ngenerated from acceleration data only, do not create the buffer sampling\nfrequency attribute for sensor types other than the accelerometer.",
"id": "GHSA-f6pj-wrqm-mccq",
"modified": "2026-05-08T18:31:26Z",
"published": "2026-05-01T15:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31764"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3225a81e8d264442b14c7c1bc965ebafa3c0ee01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/679c04c10d65d32a3f269e696b22912ff0a001b9"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F6RH-8X43-H7FG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-09 00:30 – Updated: 2024-08-20 18:31Apfloat v1.10.1 was discovered to contain an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException via the component org.apfloat.internal.DoubleCRTMath::add(double[], double[]).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-23084"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-08T23:15:07Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Apfloat v1.10.1 was discovered to contain an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException via the component org.apfloat.internal.DoubleCRTMath::add(double[], double[]).",
"id": "GHSA-f6rh-8x43-h7fg",
"modified": "2024-08-20T18:31:14Z",
"published": "2024-04-09T00:30:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23084"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/LLM4IG/5b7dd0a87db14d9c95d4c0ea62e0195b"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mtommila/apfloat"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://apfloat.com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F744-H7W2-RQMF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-03 18:30 – Updated: 2025-02-03 18:30Memory corruption while parsing the ML IE due to invalid frame content.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-45569"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-03T17:15:19Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Memory corruption while parsing the ML IE due to invalid frame content.",
"id": "GHSA-f744-h7w2-rqmf",
"modified": "2025-02-03T18:30:42Z",
"published": "2025-02-03T18:30:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45569"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.qualcomm.com/product/publicresources/securitybulletin/february-2025-bulletin.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F74J-V9XM-XXWC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-05 18:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:23An access violation vulnerability exists in the GraphPlanar::Write functionality of Diagon v1.0.139. A specially crafted network request can lead to a heap buffer overflow. An attacker can send a network request to trigger this vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-31194"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119",
"CWE-122",
"CWE-129",
"CWE-787"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-07-05T16:15:09Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An access violation vulnerability exists in the GraphPlanar::Write functionality of Diagon v1.0.139. A specially crafted network request can lead to a heap buffer overflow. An attacker can send a network request to trigger this vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-f74j-v9xm-xxwc",
"modified": "2024-04-04T05:23:46Z",
"published": "2023-07-05T18:30:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-31194"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1745"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2023-1745"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F8RM-6C2H-R7WF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:48 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:04Incorrect array position calculations in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 70.0.3538.102 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit object corruption via a crafted HTML page.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-17478"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-27T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Incorrect array position calculations in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 70.0.3538.102 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit object corruption via a crafted HTML page.",
"id": "GHSA-f8rm-6c2h-r7wf",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:04:04Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:48:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-17478"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2018/11/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://crbug.com/897512"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F9V4-7RFW-58P4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:55 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:50Secure Reliable Transport (SRT) through 1.3.4 has a CSndUList array overflow if there are many SRT connections.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-15784"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-08-29T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Secure Reliable Transport (SRT) through 1.3.4 has a CSndUList array overflow if there are many SRT connections.",
"id": "GHSA-f9v4-7rfw-58p4",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:50:56Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:55:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-15784"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Haivision/srt/pull/811"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00020.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-09/msg00036.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FCCH-XQH9-XQM4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-17 18:31 – Updated: 2025-09-16 18:31In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/amd/display: fix incorrect mpc_combine array size
[why] MAX_SURFACES is per stream, while MAX_PLANES is per asic. The mpc_combine is an array that records all the planes per asic. Therefore MAX_PLANES should be used as the array size. Using MAX_SURFACES causes array overflow when there are more than 3 planes.
[how] Use the MAX_PLANES for the mpc_combine array size.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-26914"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-129"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-17T16:15:08Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\ndrm/amd/display: fix incorrect mpc_combine array size\n\n[why]\nMAX_SURFACES is per stream, while MAX_PLANES is per asic. The\nmpc_combine is an array that records all the planes per asic. Therefore\nMAX_PLANES should be used as the array size. Using MAX_SURFACES causes\narray overflow when there are more than 3 planes.\n\n[how]\nUse the MAX_PLANES for the mpc_combine array size.",
"id": "GHSA-fcch-xqh9-xqm4",
"modified": "2025-09-16T18:31:18Z",
"published": "2024-04-17T18:31:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-26914"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0bd8ef618a42d7e6ea3f701065264e15678025e3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/39079fe8e660851abbafa90cd55cbf029210661f"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-7
Strategy: Input Validation
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Mitigation MIT-15
- For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Even though client-side checks provide minimal benefits with respect to server-side security, they are still useful. First, they can support intrusion detection. If the server receives input that should have been rejected by the client, then it may be an indication of an attack. Second, client-side error-checking can provide helpful feedback to the user about the expectations for valid input. Third, there may be a reduction in server-side processing time for accidental input errors, although this is typically a small savings.
Mitigation MIT-3
Strategy: Language Selection
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, Ada allows the programmer to constrain the values of a variable and languages such as Java and Ruby will allow the programmer to handle exceptions when an out-of-bounds index is accessed.
Mitigation MIT-11
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program's executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.
- Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as "rebasing" (for Windows) and "prelinking" (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].
Mitigation MIT-12
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When accessing a user-controlled array index, use a stringent range of values that are within the target array. Make sure that you do not allow negative values to be used. That is, verify the minimum as well as the maximum of the range of acceptable values.
Mitigation MIT-35
Be especially careful to validate all input when invoking code that crosses language boundaries, such as from an interpreted language to native code. This could create an unexpected interaction between the language boundaries. Ensure that you are not violating any of the expectations of the language with which you are interfacing. For example, even though Java may not be susceptible to buffer overflows, providing a large argument in a call to native code might trigger an overflow.
Mitigation MIT-17
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
Mitigation MIT-22
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
CAPEC-100: Overflow Buffers
Buffer Overflow attacks target improper or missing bounds checking on buffer operations, typically triggered by input injected by an adversary. As a consequence, an adversary is able to write past the boundaries of allocated buffer regions in memory, causing a program crash or potentially redirection of execution as per the adversaries' choice.