COMMON WEAKNESS ENUMERATIONDraft

CWE-486

Comparison of Classes by Name

The product compares classes by name, which can cause it to use the wrong class when multiple classes can have the same name.

Abstraction

Variant

Structure

Simple

Likelihood of Exploit

High

Understand the problem

What is the problem?

The product compares classes by name, which can cause it to use the wrong class when multiple classes can have the same name.

Extended description

If the decision to trust the methods and data of an object is based on the name of a class, it is possible for malicious users to send objects of the same name as trusted classes and thereby gain the trust afforded to known classes and types.

Root cause

How and when does the problem arise?

Lifecycle phase

Implementation

Risk

What does successful exploitation lead to?

Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands

Affected security scopes: Integrity, Confidentiality, Availability

If a product relies solely on the name of an object to determine identity, it may execute the incorrect or unintended code.

Defence

How is it prevented and fixed?

Implementation

Implementation-phase defence

Detail
Use class equivalency to determine type. Rather than use the class name to determine if an object is of a given type, use the getClass() method, and == operator.

Verification

How is it detected?

Automated Static Analysis

High
Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)