CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency

Extended Description

This can allow the actor to perform actions more frequently than expected. The actor could be a human or an automated process such as a virus or bot. This could be used to cause a denial of service, compromise program logic (such as limiting humans to a single vote), or other consequences. For example, an authentication routine might not limit the number of times an attacker can guess a password. Or, a web site might conduct a poll but only expect humans to vote a maximum of once a day.

Code Examples & CVEs

Demonstrative Examples

In the following code a username and password is read from a socket and an attempt is made to authenticate the username and password. The code will continuously checked the socket for a username and password until it has been authenticated.

This code does not place any restriction on the number of authentication attempts made. There should be a limit on the number of authentication attempts made to prevent brute force attacks as in the following example code.

BadC

char username[USERNAME_SIZE];char password[PASSWORD_SIZE];                      while (isValidUser == 0) {                         if (getNextMessage(socket, username, USERNAME_SIZE) > 0) {if (getNextMessage(socket, password, PASSWORD_SIZE) > 0) {isValidUser = AuthenticateUser(username, password);}}                      }return(SUCCESS);

GoodC

int count = 0;while ((isValidUser == 0) && (count < MAX_ATTEMPTS)) {                         if (getNextMessage(socket, username, USERNAME_SIZE) > 0) {if (getNextMessage(socket, password, PASSWORD_SIZE) > 0) {isValidUser = AuthenticateUser(username, password);}}count++;                      }if (isValidUser) {return(SUCCESS);}else {return(FAIL);}

Observed CVE Examples (2)

CVE-2024-50653

Chain: e-commerce product has a "front-end restriction" for coupon use (CWE-602), but the server does not restrict the number of requests for the same coupon (CWE-799)

View Details

CVE-2002-1876

Mail server allows attackers to prevent other users from accessing mail by sending large number of rapid requests.

View Details

Source-backed guidance

Additional facts reviewed against primary or authoritative security sources.

Verify controls for CWE-799 with SSDF evidence

Use NIST SSDF verification and vulnerability-response practices to detect CWE-799, Improper Control of Interaction Frequency, 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 Framework — National Institute of Standards and Technology

Make elimination of CWE-799 a product outcome

Apply CISA's Secure by Design principle of taking ownership of customer security outcomes to CWE-799, Improper Control of Interaction Frequency. Put the weakness in the product threat model and security roadmap, fund class-level design and platform changes, prefer safe defaults and reusable guardrails, and publish measurable progress. Do not transfer the primary burden to customer configuration when the manufacturer can remove or contain the root cause in the product.

Shifting the Balance of Cybersecurity Risk: Secure by Design Software — Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Connect Improper Control of Interaction Frequency to documented attack evidence

Recorded impacts include DoS: Resource Consumption (Other), Bypass Protection Mechanism, and Other; observed examples include CVE-2024-50653, and CVE-2002-1876; related weaknesses include CWE-691. Use these source-defined anchors to turn CWE-799 into implementation, review, and verification checks for the affected component.

CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency — MITRE CWE

Apply precise root-cause mapping to CWE-799

Apply MITRE's full root-cause mapping guidance when using CWE-799, Improper Control of Interaction Frequency. 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 Guidance — MITRE CWE

Validate CWE-799 with root-cause mapping checks

Apply MITRE's root-cause mapping quick tips to CWE-799, Improper Control of Interaction Frequency. 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 Tips — MITRE CWE

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency?+

CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency is a Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) entry maintained by MITRE. The product does not properly limit the number or frequency of interactions that it has with an actor, such as the number of incoming requests. This can allow the actor to perform actions more frequently than expected. The actor could be a human or an automated process such as a virus or bot. This could be used to cause a denial of service, compromise program logic (such as limiting humans to a single vote), or other consequences. For example, an authentication routine might not limit the number of times an attacker can guess a password. Or, a web site might conduct a poll but only expect humans to vote a maximum of once a day.

What are the security consequences of Improper Control of Interaction Frequency?+

If exploited, CWE-799 (Improper Control of Interaction Frequency) it can compromise Availability, Access Control and Other, leading to outcomes such as DoS: Resource Consumption (Other), Bypass Protection Mechanism and Other.

Which programming languages are affected by Improper Control of Interaction Frequency?+

CWE-799 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 Improper Control of Interaction Frequency?+

MITRE documents real CVEs mapped to CWE-799, including CVE-2024-50653 and CVE-2002-1876. 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-799 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.

CWE-799: Improper Control of Interaction Frequency

Extended Description

Technical Details

Applicable To

Security Consequences

Scope

Impact

Mitigation Strategies

Detection Methods