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.)
CWE-114 Class Incomplete
Process Control
Process Control vulnerabilities occur when an application executes commands or loads libraries from an untrusted source or environment, allowing an attacker to run malicious code.
Definition
What is CWE-114?
Process Control vulnerabilities occur when an application executes commands or loads libraries from an untrusted source or environment, allowing an attacker to run malicious code.
This flaw typically manifests in two ways. First, an attacker can directly control the command string itself, often by injecting malicious input that gets passed to a system shell or execution function. Second, an attacker can manipulate the environment in which the command runs—such as the PATH variable or library search order—to change the meaning of a seemingly safe command, causing the application to load a malicious binary or script.
Effectively managing this risk requires validating and sanitizing all external inputs used in execution contexts and hardening the application's runtime environment. While SAST tools can detect dangerous patterns, Plexicus uses AI to analyze your codebase and provide specific, automated remediation suggestions, helping you fix these critical security gaps efficiently across your entire application portfolio.
Real-world impact
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-114
No public CVE references are linked to this CWE in MITRE's catalog yet.
How attackers exploit it
Step-by-step attacker path
- 1
The following code uses System.loadLibrary() to load code from a native library named library.dll, which is normally found in a standard system directory.
- 2
The problem here is that System.loadLibrary() accepts a library name, not a path, for the library to be loaded. From the Java 1.4.2 API documentation this function behaves as follows [1]: A file containing native code is loaded from the local file system from a place where library files are conventionally obtained. The details of this process are implementation-dependent. The mapping from a library name to a specific filename is done in a system-specific manner. If an attacker is able to place a malicious copy of library.dll higher in the search order than file the application intends to load, then the application will load the malicious copy instead of the intended file. Because of the nature of the application, it runs with elevated privileges, which means the contents of the attacker's library.dll will now be run with elevated privileges, possibly giving them complete control of the system.
- 3
The following code from a privileged application uses a registry entry to determine the directory in which it is installed and loads a library file based on a relative path from the specified directory.
- 4
The code in this example allows an attacker to load an arbitrary library, from which code will be executed with the elevated privilege of the application, by modifying a registry key to specify a different path containing a malicious version of INITLIB. Because the program does not validate the value read from the environment, if an attacker can control the value of APPHOME, they can fool the application into running malicious code.
- 5
The following code is from a web-based administration utility that allows users access to an interface through which they can update their profile on the system. The utility makes use of a library named liberty.dll, which is normally found in a standard system directory.
Vulnerable code example
Vulnerable Java
The following code uses System.loadLibrary() to load code from a native library named library.dll, which is normally found in a standard system directory.
...
System.loadLibrary("library.dll");
... Secure code example
Secure pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
return executeWithGuards(safe);
} What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Prevention checklist
How to prevent CWE-114
- Architecture and Design Libraries that are loaded should be well understood and come from a trusted source. The application can execute code contained in the native libraries, which often contain calls that are susceptible to other security problems, such as buffer overflows or command injection. All native libraries should be validated to determine if the application requires the use of the library. It is very difficult to determine what these native libraries actually do, and the potential for malicious code is high. In addition, the potential for an inadvertent mistake in these native libraries is also high, as many are written in C or C++ and may be susceptible to buffer overflow or race condition problems. To help prevent buffer overflow attacks, validate all input to native calls for content and length. If the native library does not come from a trusted source, review the source code of the library. The library should be built from the reviewed source before using it.
Detection signals
How to detect CWE-114
Plexicus auto-detects CWE-114 and opens a fix PR in under 60 seconds.
Codex Remedium scans every commit, identifies this exact weakness, and ships a reviewer-ready pull request with the patch. No tickets. No hand-offs.
Frequently asked questions What is CWE-114?
How serious is CWE-114?
What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-114?
How can I prevent CWE-114?
How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-114?
Where can I learn more about CWE-114?
Frequently asked questions
What is CWE-114?
Process Control vulnerabilities occur when an application executes commands or loads libraries from an untrusted source or environment, allowing an attacker to run malicious code.
How serious is CWE-114?
MITRE has not published a likelihood-of-exploit rating for this weakness. Treat it as medium-impact until your threat model proves otherwise.
What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-114?
MITRE has not specified affected platforms for this CWE — it can apply across most application stacks.
How can I prevent CWE-114?
Libraries that are loaded should be well understood and come from a trusted source. The application can execute code contained in the native libraries, which often contain calls that are susceptible to other security problems, such as buffer overflows or command injection. All native libraries should be validated to determine if the application requires the use of the library. It is very difficult to determine what these native libraries actually do, and the potential for malicious code is…
How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-114?
Plexicus's SAST engine matches the data-flow signature for CWE-114 on every commit. When a match is found, our Codex Remedium agent opens a fix PR with the corrected code, tests, and a one-line summary for the reviewer.
Where can I learn more about CWE-114?
MITRE publishes the canonical definition at https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/114.html. You can also reference OWASP and NIST documentation for adjacent guidance.
Related weaknesses
Weaknesses related to CWE-114
Resources
Further reading
- MITRE — official CWE-114 https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/114.html
- Seven Pernicious Kingdoms: A Taxonomy of Software Security Errors https://samate.nist.gov/SSATTM_Content/papers/Seven%20Pernicious%20Kingdoms%20-%20Taxonomy%20of%20Sw%20Security%20Errors%20-%20Tsipenyuk%20-%20Chess%20-%20McGraw.pdf
Ready when you are
Don't Let Security
Weigh You Down.
Stop choosing between AI velocity and security debt. Plexicus is the only platform that runs Vibe Coding Security and ASPM in parallel — one workflow, every codebase.