CWE-1039: Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism

ClassIncomplete

The product uses an automated mechanism such as machine learning to recognize complex data inputs (e.g. image or audio) as a particular concept or category, but it does not properly detect or handle inputs that have been modified or constructed in a way that causes the mechanism to detect a different, incorrect concept.

View on MITRE
Back to CWE Lookup

Extended Description

When techniques such as machine learning are used to automatically classify input streams, and those classifications are used for security-critical decisions, then any mistake in classification can introduce a vulnerability that allows attackers to cause the product to make the wrong security decision or disrupt service of the automated mechanism. If the mechanism is not developed or "trained" with enough input data or has not adequately undergone test and evaluation, then attackers may be able to craft malicious inputs that intentionally trigger the incorrect classification. Targeted technologies include, but are not necessarily limited to: automated speech recognition automated image recognition automated cyber defense Chatbot, LLMs, generative AI For example, an attacker might modify road signs or road surface markings to trick autonomous vehicles into misreading the sign/marking and performing a dangerous action. Another example includes an attacker that crafts highly specific and complex prompts to "jailbreak" a chatbot to bypass safety or privacy mechanisms, better known as prompt injection attacks.

Technical Details

Structure
Simple

Applicable To

Languages
Not Language-Specific
Platforms

Source-backed guidance

Additional facts reviewed against primary or authoritative security sources.

Verify controls for CWE-1039 with SSDF evidence

Use NIST SSDF verification and vulnerability-response practices to detect CWE-1039, Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism, throughout the product lifecycle. Derive review questions, static or dynamic checks, and negative tests from the CWE's causal behavior; define the components and lifecycle stages each check covers; and retain findings with enough evidence to distinguish the root cause from symptoms and impacts. Track escapes and false negatives, then improve the verification plan after every confirmed occurrence.

NIST SP 800-218 Secure Software Development FrameworkNational Institute of Standards and Technology

Address Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognit… during Architecture and Design

MITRE associates mitigation with Architecture and Design, Implementation, and Integration; documented detection approaches include Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation, and Architecture or Design Review; recorded impacts include Bypass Protection Mechanism, DoS: Resource Consumption (Other), DoS: Instability, Read Application Data, and Varies by Context. Use these source-defined anchors to turn CWE-1039 into implementation, review, and verification checks for the affected component.

CWE-1039: Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition MechanismMITRE CWE

Triage CWE-1039 against known exploitation evidence

Use CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog to test whether a vulnerability mapped to CWE-1039, Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism, has evidence of exploitation in the wild. Confirm the CVE-to-CWE root-cause mapping independently before attaching the example, then capture the affected product, required action, and remediation deadline. A missing KEV match is not evidence that the weakness is unexploited, and a KEV entry must not be generalized to every occurrence of this CWE.

Known Exploited Vulnerabilities CatalogCybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Apply precise root-cause mapping to CWE-1039

Apply MITRE's full root-cause mapping guidance when using CWE-1039, Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism. Separate weakness language from attacker prerequisites and technical impact, check the entry's abstraction and vulnerability-mapping notes, and prefer the most specific Base or Variant supported by the evidence. Record the rejected alternatives and require an independent review before the mapping is used for remediation trends or program metrics.

CVE to CWE Root Cause Mapping GuidanceMITRE CWE

Validate CWE-1039 with root-cause mapping checks

Apply MITRE's root-cause mapping quick tips to CWE-1039, Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism. Confirm the finding describes the causal weakness rather than an impact or attack pattern, compare the abstraction and mapping notes with plausible alternatives, and have a second reviewer challenge the selection. Preserve the evidence and reasoning so recurring defects can be measured against one consistent identifier.

CVE to CWE Root Cause Mapping Quick TipsMITRE CWE

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CWE-1039: Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism?+

CWE-1039: Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism is a Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) entry maintained by MITRE. The product uses an automated mechanism such as machine learning to recognize complex data inputs (e.g. image or audio) as a particular concept or category, but it does not properly detect or handle inputs that have been modified or constructed in a way that causes the mechanism to detect a different, incorrect concept. When techniques such as machine learning are used to automatically classify input streams, and those classifications are used for security-critical decisions, then any mistake in classification can introduce a vulnerability that allows attackers to cause the product to make the wrong security decision or disrupt service of the automated mechanism. If the mechanism is not developed or "trained" with enough input data or has not adequately undergone test and evaluation, then attackers may be able to craft malicious inputs that intentionally trigger the incorrect classification. Targeted technologies include, but are not necessarily limited to: automated speech recognition automated image recognition automated cyber defense Chatbot, LLMs, generative AI For example, an attacker might modify road signs or road surface markings to trick autonomous vehicles into misreading the sign/marking and performing a dangerous action. Another example includes an attacker that crafts highly specific and complex prompts to "jailbreak" a chatbot to bypass safety or privacy mechanisms, better known as prompt injection attacks.

What are the security consequences of Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism?+

If exploited, CWE-1039 (Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism) it can compromise Integrity, Availability, Confidentiality and Other, leading to outcomes such as Bypass Protection Mechanism, DoS: Resource Consumption (Other), DoS: Instability, Read Application Data and Varies by Context.

How do you prevent or mitigate Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism?+

Recommended mitigations for CWE-1039 include: Algorithmic modifications such as model pruning or compression can help mitigate this weakness. Model pruning ensures that only weights that are most relevant to the task are used in the inference of incoming data and has shown resilience to adversarial perturbed data. Consider implementing adversarial training, a method that introduces adversarial examples into the training data to promote robustness of algorithm at inference time. Consider implementing model hardening to fortify the internal structure of the algorithm, including techniques such as regularization and optimization to desensitize algorithms to minor input perturbations and/or changes.

How is Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism detected?+

CWE-1039 can be detected using Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation and Architecture or Design Review. Combining automated tooling with manual review typically yields the best coverage.

Which programming languages are affected by Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism?+

CWE-1039 commonly affects Not Language-Specific. Note that weaknesses are often language-agnostic patterns, so secure coding practices apply broadly.

What are real-world examples of Inadequate Detection or Handling of Adversarial Input Perturbations in Automated Recognition Mechanism?+

MITRE documents real CVEs mapped to CWE-1039, including CVE-2025-26644. You can look up the full details of each CVE, including CVSS scores and remediation guidance, on our CVE Lookup tool.

What is the difference between a CWE and a CVE?+

A CWE (Common Weakness Enumeration) like CWE-1039 describes a category of software weakness — the underlying flaw type. A CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) identifies a specific, real-world vulnerability in a particular product. In short, a CWE is the kind of mistake, and a CVE is an instance of that mistake being found in software.

Learn More

Advertisement