CWE-483 Base Draft Low likelihood

Incorrect Block Delimitation

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.

Definition

What is CWE-483?

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.
In programming languages like JavaScript, Python, or Go, braces, indentation, or keywords are sometimes optional for single-statement blocks. However, when you intend for multiple statements to execute together—such as within an `if` condition or a loop—omitting the explicit block delimiter means only the first statement is controlled by that condition. Subsequent statements execute unconditionally, creating a critical logic error. This error often manifests as a subtle bug where security-critical operations, like privilege checks or input validation, are bypassed. For example, an access control check might only guard a logging statement while allowing the actual data transaction to proceed without authorization. Always use explicit delimiters for multi-statement blocks to ensure your code's logic and security controls behave as intended.
Real-world impact

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-483

  • incorrect indentation of "goto" statement makes it more difficult to detect an incorrect goto (Apple's "goto fail")

How attackers exploit it

Step-by-step attacker path

  1. 1

    In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

  2. 2

    This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.

  3. 3

    In this example, the programmer has indented the Do_Y() statement as if the intention is that the function should be associated with the preceding conditional and should only be called when the condition is true. However, because Do_X() was called on the same line as the conditional and there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

  4. 4

    This might not be what the programmer intended. When the condition is critical for security, such as in making a security decision or detecting a critical error, this may produce a vulnerability.

Vulnerable code example

Vulnerable C

In this example, the programmer has indented the statements to call Do_X() and Do_Y(), as if the intention is that these functions are only called when the condition is true. However, because there are no braces to signify the block, Do_Y() will always be executed, even if the condition is false.

Vulnerable C
if (condition==true)
  	Do_X();
  	Do_Y();
Secure code example

Secure pseudo

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-483

  • Implementation Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.
Detection signals

How to detect CWE-483

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.)

Plexicus auto-fix

Plexicus auto-detects CWE-483 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

Frequently asked questions

What is CWE-483?

This vulnerability occurs when a developer fails to use explicit braces or delimiters to group multiple statements within a block, leading to unexpected program logic.

How serious is CWE-483?

MITRE rates the likelihood of exploit as Low — exploitation is uncommon, but the weakness should still be fixed when discovered.

What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-483?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: C, C++.

How can I prevent CWE-483?

Always use explicit block delimitation and use static-analysis technologies to enforce this practice.

How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-483?

Plexicus's SAST engine matches the data-flow signature for CWE-483 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-483?

MITRE publishes the canonical definition at https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/483.html. You can also reference OWASP and NIST documentation for adjacent guidance.

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.