The product uses a one-way cryptographic hash against an input that should not be reversible, such as a password, but the product does not also use a salt as part of the input.
View on MITREThis makes it easier for attackers to pre-compute the hash value using dictionary attack techniques such as rainbow tables. It should be noted that, despite common perceptions, the use of a good salt with a hash does not sufficiently increase the effort for an attacker who is targeting an individual password, or who has a large amount of computing resources available, such as with cloud-based services or specialized, inexpensive hardware. Offline password cracking can still be effective if the hash function is not expensive to compute; many cryptographic functions are designed to be efficient and can be vulnerable to attacks using massive computing resources, even if the hash is cryptographically strong. The use of a salt only slightly increases the computing requirements for an attacker compared to other strategies such as adaptive hash functions. See CWE-916 for more details.
If an attacker can gain access to the hashes, then the lack of a salt makes it easier to conduct brute force attacks using techniques such as rainbow tables.
If a technique that requires extra computational effort can not be implemented, then for each password that is processed, generate a new random salt using a strong random number generator with unpredictable seeds. Add the salt to the plaintext password before hashing it. When storing the hash, also store the salt. Do not use the same salt for every password.
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Cost effective for partial coverage: Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Cost effective for partial coverage: Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective: Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective: Source code Weakness Analyzer Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Cost effective for partial coverage: Configuration Checker
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective: Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction Cost effective for partial coverage: Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)
In both of these examples, a user is logged in if their given password matches a stored password:
This code relies exclusively on a password mechanism (CWE-309) using only one factor of authentication (CWE-308). If an attacker can steal or guess a user's password, they are given full access to their account. Note this code also uses SHA-1, which is a weak hash (CWE-328). It also does not use a salt (CWE-759).
unsigned char *check_passwd(char *plaintext) {ctext = simple_digest("sha1",plaintext,strlen(plaintext), ... ); //Login if hash matches stored hash if (equal(ctext, secret_password())) {login_user();}}In both of these examples, a user is logged in if their given password matches a stored password:
This code relies exclusively on a password mechanism (CWE-309) using only one factor of authentication (CWE-308). If an attacker can steal or guess a user's password, they are given full access to their account. Note this code also uses SHA-1, which is a weak hash (CWE-328). It also does not use a salt (CWE-759).
String plainText = new String(plainTextIn);MessageDigest encer = MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA");encer.update(plainTextIn);byte[] digest = password.digest(); //Login if hash matches stored hash if (equal(digest,secret_password())) {login_user();}In this example, a new user provides a new username and password to create an account. The program hashes the new user's password then stores it in a database.
While it is good to avoid storing a cleartext password, the program does not provide a salt to the hashing function, thus increasing the chances of an attacker being able to reverse the hash and discover the original password if the database is compromised.
def storePassword(userName,Password):hasher = hashlib.new('md5')hasher.update(Password)hashedPassword = hasher.digest() # UpdateUserLogin returns True on success, False otherwise return updateUserLogin(userName,hashedPassword)In this example, a new user provides a new username and password to create an account. The program hashes the new user's password then stores it in a database.
While it is good to avoid storing a cleartext password, the program does not provide a salt to the hashing function, thus increasing the chances of an attacker being able to reverse the hash and discover the original password if the database is compromised.
def storePassword(userName,Password):hasher = hashlib.new('md5',b'SaltGoesHere')hasher.update(Password)hashedPassword = hasher.digest() # UpdateUserLogin returns True on success, False otherwise return updateUserLogin(userName,hashedPassword)Router does not use a salt with a hash, making it easier to crack passwords.
View DetailsRouter does not use a salt with a hash, making it easier to crack passwords.
View DetailsCWE-759: Use of a One-Way Hash without a Salt is a Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) entry maintained by MITRE. The product uses a one-way cryptographic hash against an input that should not be reversible, such as a password, but the product does not also use a salt as part of the input. This makes it easier for attackers to pre-compute the hash value using dictionary attack techniques such as rainbow tables. It should be noted that, despite common perceptions, the use of a good salt with a hash does not sufficiently increase the effort for an attacker who is targeting an individual password, or who has a large amount of computing resources available, such as with cloud-based services or specialized, inexpensive hardware. Offline password cracking can still be effective if the hash function is not expensive to compute; many cryptographic functions are designed to be efficient and can be vulnerable to attacks using massive computing resources, even if the hash is cryptographically strong. The use of a salt only slightly increases the computing requirements for an attacker compared to other strategies such as adaptive hash functions. See CWE-916 for more details.
If exploited, CWE-759 (Use of a One-Way Hash without a Salt) it can compromise Access Control, leading to outcomes such as Bypass Protection Mechanism and Gain Privileges or Assume Identity.
Recommended mitigations for CWE-759 include: If a technique that requires extra computational effort can not be implemented, then for each password that is processed, generate a new random salt using a strong random number generator with unpredictable seeds. Add the salt to the plaintext password before hashing it. When storing the hash, also store the salt. Do not use the same salt for every password.
CWE-759 can be detected using Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode, Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode, Manual Static Analysis - Source Code, Automated Static Analysis - Source Code, Automated Static Analysis and Architecture or Design Review. Combining automated tooling with manual review typically yields the best coverage.
CWE-759 commonly affects Not Language-Specific. Note that weaknesses are often language-agnostic patterns, so secure coding practices apply broadly.
MITRE documents real CVEs mapped to CWE-759, including CVE-2008-1526 and CVE-2006-1058. You can look up the full details of each CVE, including CVSS scores and remediation guidance, on our CVE Lookup tool.
A CWE (Common Weakness Enumeration) like CWE-759 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.