| Home > CWE List > CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') (4.20) |
|
|
Weakness ID: 362
Vulnerability Mapping:
ALLOWED
This CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review
(with careful review of mapping notes)
Abstraction: Class Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Class level weaknesses typically describe issues in terms of 1 or 2 of the following dimensions: behavior, property, and resource. |
A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc.
A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:
A race condition exists when an "interfering code sequence" can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity.
The interfering code sequence could be "trusted" or "untrusted." A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.
This table specifies different individual consequences
associated with the weakness. The Scope identifies the application security area that is
violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an
adversary succeeds in exploiting this weakness. The Likelihood provides information about
how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other
consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a weakness will be
exploited to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to
achieve a different impact.
| Impact | Details |
|---|---|
|
DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory); DoS: Resource Consumption (Other) |
Scope: Availability
When a race condition makes it possible to bypass a resource cleanup routine or trigger multiple initialization routines, it may lead to resource exhaustion.
|
|
DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Instability |
Scope: Availability
When a race condition allows multiple control flows to access a resource simultaneously, it might lead the product(s) into unexpected states, possibly resulting in a crash.
|
|
Read Files or Directories; Read Application Data |
Scope: Confidentiality, Integrity
When a race condition is combined with predictable resource names and loose permissions, it may be possible for an attacker to overwrite or access confidential data (CWE-59).
|
|
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Gain Privileges or Assume Identity; Bypass Protection Mechanism |
Scope: Access Control
This can have security implications when the expected synchronization is in security-critical code, such as recording whether a user is authenticated or modifying important state information that should not be influenced by an outsider.
|
| Phase(s) | Mitigation |
|---|---|
|
Architecture and Design |
In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
|
|
Architecture and Design |
Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
|
|
Architecture and Design |
Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400). |
|
Implementation |
When using multithreading and operating on shared variables, only use thread-safe functions.
|
|
Implementation |
Use atomic operations on shared variables. Be wary of innocent-looking constructs such as "x++". This may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read, followed by a computation, followed by a write.
|
|
Implementation |
Use a mutex if available, but be sure to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-412.
|
|
Implementation |
Avoid double-checked locking (CWE-609) and other implementation errors that arise when trying to avoid the overhead of synchronization.
|
|
Implementation |
Disable interrupts or signals over critical parts of the code, but also make sure that the code does not go into a large or infinite loop.
|
|
Implementation |
Use the volatile type modifier for critical variables to avoid unexpected compiler optimization or reordering. This does not necessarily solve the synchronization problem, but it can help.
|
|
Architecture and Design; Operation |
Strategy: Environment Hardening Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
|
This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this
weakness. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to
similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition,
relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user
may want to explore.
Relevant to the view "Research Concepts" (View-1000)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChildOf |
|
662 | Improper Synchronization |
| ParentOf |
|
364 | Signal Handler Race Condition |
| ParentOf |
|
366 | Race Condition within a Thread |
| ParentOf |
|
367 | Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition |
| ParentOf |
|
368 | Context Switching Race Condition |
| ParentOf |
|
421 | Race Condition During Access to Alternate Channel |
| ParentOf |
|
689 | Permission Race Condition During Resource Copy |
| ParentOf |
|
1223 | Race Condition for Write-Once Attributes |
| ParentOf |
|
1298 | Hardware Logic Contains Race Conditions |
| CanFollow |
|
662 | Improper Synchronization |
| CanPrecede |
|
416 | Use After Free |
| CanPrecede |
|
476 | NULL Pointer Dereference |
Relevant to the view "Weaknesses for Simplified Mapping of Published Vulnerabilities" (View-1003)
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| MemberOf |
|
1003 | Weaknesses for Simplified Mapping of Published Vulnerabilities |
| ParentOf |
|
367 | Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition |
The different Modes of Introduction provide information
about how and when this
weakness may be introduced. The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which
introduction
may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the
given
phase.
| Phase | Note |
|---|---|
| Architecture and Design | |
| Implementation | Programmers may assume that certain code sequences execute too quickly to be affected by an interfering code sequence; when they are not, this violates atomicity. For example, the single "x++" statement may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read (the original value of x), followed by a computation (x+1), followed by a write (save the result to x). |
This listing shows possible areas for which the given
weakness could appear. These
may be for specific named Languages, Operating Systems, Architectures, Paradigms,
Technologies,
or a class of such platforms. The platform is listed along with how frequently the given
weakness appears for that instance.
| Languages |
C (Sometimes Prevalent) C++ (Sometimes Prevalent) Java (Sometimes Prevalent) |
| Technologies |
Class: Mobile (Undetermined Prevalence) Class: ICS/OT (Undetermined Prevalence) |
Example 1
This code could be used in an e-commerce application that supports transfers between accounts. It takes the total amount of the transfer, sends it to the new account, and deducts the amount from the original account.
A race condition could occur between the calls to GetBalanceFromDatabase() and SendNewBalanceToDatabase().
Suppose the balance is initially 100.00. An attack could be constructed as follows:
At this stage, the attacker should have a balance of 19.00 (due to 81.00 worth of transfers), but the balance is 99.00, as recorded in the database.
To prevent this weakness, the programmer has several options, including using a lock to prevent multiple simultaneous requests to the web application, or using a synchronization mechanism that includes all the code between GetBalanceFromDatabase() and SendNewBalanceToDatabase().
Example 2
The following function attempts to acquire a lock in order to perform operations on a shared resource.
However, the code does not check the value returned by pthread_mutex_lock() for errors. If pthread_mutex_lock() cannot acquire the mutex for any reason, the function may introduce a race condition into the program and result in undefined behavior.
In order to avoid data races, correctly written programs must check the result of thread synchronization functions and appropriately handle all errors, either by attempting to recover from them or reporting them to higher levels.
Example 3
Suppose a processor's Memory Management Unit (MMU) has 5 other shadow MMUs to distribute its workload for its various cores. Each MMU has the start address and end address of "accessible" memory. Any time this accessible range changes (as per the processor's boot status), the main MMU sends an update message to all the shadow MMUs.
Suppose the interconnect fabric does not prioritize such "update" packets over other general traffic packets. This introduces a race condition. If an attacker can flood the target with enough messages so that some of those attack packets reach the target before the new access ranges gets updated, then the attacker can leverage this scenario.
Note: this is a curated list of examples for users to understand the variety of ways in which this weakness can be introduced. It is not a complete list of all CVEs that are related to this CWE entry.
| Reference | Description |
|---|---|
|
OS kernel stores sensitive data in improperly locked memory, allowing local users to gain privileges by winning a race condition
|
|
|
Go application for cloud management creates a world-writable sudoers file that allows local attackers to inject sudo rules and escalate privileges to root by winning a race condition.
|
|
|
TOCTOU in sandbox process allows installation of untrusted browser add-ons by replacing a file after it has been verified, but before it is executed
|
|
|
Race condition leading to a crash by calling a hook removal procedure while other activities are occurring at the same time.
|
|
|
chain: time-of-check time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition in program allows bypass of protection mechanism that was designed to prevent symlink attacks.
|
|
|
chain: time-of-check time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition in program allows bypass of protection mechanism that was designed to prevent symlink attacks.
|
|
|
Unsynchronized caching operation enables a race condition that causes messages to be sent to a deallocated object.
|
|
|
Race condition during initialization triggers a buffer overflow.
|
|
|
Daemon crash by quickly performing operations and undoing them, which eventually leads to an operation that does not acquire a lock.
|
|
|
chain: race condition triggers NULL pointer dereference
|
|
|
Race condition in library function could cause data to be sent to the wrong process.
|
|
|
Race condition in file parser leads to heap corruption.
|
|
|
chain: race condition allows attacker to access an object while it is still being initialized, causing software to access uninitialized memory.
|
|
|
chain: race condition for an argument value, possibly resulting in NULL dereference
|
|
| Ordinality | Description |
|---|---|
|
Primary
|
(where the weakness exists independent of other weaknesses)
|
Resultant
|
(where the weakness is typically related to the presence of some other weaknesses)
|
| Method | Details |
|---|---|
|
Black Box |
Black box methods may be able to identify evidence of race conditions via methods such as multiple simultaneous connections, which may cause the software to become instable or crash. However, race conditions with very narrow timing windows would not be detectable.
|
|
White Box |
|
|
Automated Dynamic Analysis |
This weakness can be detected using dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the software using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The software's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results. Race conditions may be detected with a stress-test by calling the software simultaneously from a large number of threads or processes, and look for evidence of any unexpected behavior. Insert breakpoints or delays in between relevant code statements to artificially expand the race window so that it will be easier to detect. Effectiveness: Moderate |
|
Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Effectiveness: High |
|
Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Cost effective for partial coverage:
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial |
|
Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Effectiveness: High |
|
Manual Static Analysis - Source Code |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Effectiveness: High |
|
Automated Static Analysis - Source Code |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective:
Effectiveness: High |
|
Architecture or Design Review |
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: Highly cost effective:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Effectiveness: High |
This MemberOf Relationships table shows additional CWE Categories and Views that
reference this weakness as a member. This information is often useful in understanding where a
weakness fits within the context of external information sources.
| Nature | Type | ID | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| MemberOf | 635 | Weaknesses Originally Used by NVD from 2008 to 2016 | |
| MemberOf | 743 | CERT C Secure Coding Standard (2008) Chapter 10 - Input Output (FIO) | |
| MemberOf | 751 | 2009 Top 25 - Insecure Interaction Between Components | |
| MemberOf | 801 | 2010 Top 25 - Insecure Interaction Between Components | |
| MemberOf | 852 | The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011) Chapter 9 - Visibility and Atomicity (VNA) | |
| MemberOf | 867 | 2011 Top 25 - Weaknesses On the Cusp | |
| MemberOf | 877 | CERT C++ Secure Coding Section 09 - Input Output (FIO) | |
| MemberOf | 882 | CERT C++ Secure Coding Section 14 - Concurrency (CON) | |
| MemberOf | 988 | SFP Secondary Cluster: Race Condition Window | |
| MemberOf | 1142 | SEI CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java - Guidelines 08. Visibility and Atomicity (VNA) | |
| MemberOf | 1364 | ICS Communications: Zone Boundary Failures | |
| MemberOf | 1365 | ICS Communications: Unreliability | |
| MemberOf | 1366 | ICS Communications: Frail Security in Protocols | |
| MemberOf | 1376 | ICS Engineering (Construction/Deployment): Security Gaps in Commissioning | |
| MemberOf | 1387 | Weaknesses in the 2022 CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses | |
| MemberOf | 1401 | Comprehensive Categorization: Concurrency | |
| MemberOf | 1425 | Weaknesses in the 2023 CWE Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Weaknesses | |
| MemberOf | 1441 | OWASP Top Ten 2025 Category A06:2025 - Insecure Design |
| Usage |
ALLOWED-WITH-REVIEW
(this CWE ID could be used to map to real-world vulnerabilities in limited situations requiring careful review)
|
| Reason | Abstraction |
|
Rationale |
This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate |
|
Comments |
Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit |
Research Gap
Research Gap
Research Gap
Maintenance
| Mapped Taxonomy Name | Node ID | Fit | Mapped Node Name |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLOVER | Race Conditions | ||
| The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java (2011) | VNA03-J | Do not assume that a group of calls to independently atomic methods is atomic |
| [REF-44] | Michael Howard, David LeBlanc and John Viega. "24 Deadly Sins of Software Security". "Sin 13: Race Conditions." Page 205. McGraw-Hill. 2010. |
| [REF-349] |
Andrei Alexandrescu. "volatile - Multithreaded Programmer's Best Friend". Dr. Dobb's. 2008-02-01.
<https://drdobbs.com/cpp/volatile-the-multithreaded-programmers-b/184403766>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-350] |
Steven Devijver. "Thread-safe webapps using Spring".
<https://web.archive.org/web/20170609174845/http://www.javalobby.org/articles/thread-safe/index.jsp>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-351] |
David Wheeler. "Prevent race conditions". 2007-10-04.
<https://www.ida.liu.se/~TDDC90/literature/papers/SP-race-conditions.pdf>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-352] |
Matt Bishop. "Race Conditions, Files, and Security Flaws; or the Tortoise and the Hare Redux". 1995-09.
<https://seclab.cs.ucdavis.edu/projects/vulnerabilities/scriv/ucd-ecs-95-08.pdf>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-353] |
David Wheeler. "Secure Programming for Linux and Unix HOWTO". 2003-03-03.
<https://dwheeler.com/secure-programs/Secure-Programs-HOWTO/avoid-race.html>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-354] |
Blake Watts. "Discovering and Exploiting Named Pipe Security Flaws for Fun and Profit". 2002-04.
<https://www.blakewatts.com/blog/discovering-and-exploiting-named-pipe-security-flaws-for-fun-and-profit>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-355] |
Roberto Paleari, Davide Marrone, Danilo Bruschi and Mattia Monga. "On Race Vulnerabilities in Web Applications".
<http://security.dico.unimi.it/~roberto/pubs/dimva08-web.pdf>. |
| [REF-356] |
"Avoiding Race Conditions and Insecure File Operations". Apple Developer Connection.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20081010155022/http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Security/Conceptual/SecureCodingGuide/Articles/RaceConditions.html>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-357] |
Johannes Ullrich. "Top 25 Series - Rank 25 - Race Conditions". SANS Software Security Institute. 2010-03-26.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20100530231203/http://blogs.sans.org:80/appsecstreetfighter/2010/03/26/top-25-series-rank-25-race-conditions/>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-76] |
Sean Barnum and Michael Gegick. "Least Privilege". 2005-09-14.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20211209014121/https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/bsi/articles/knowledge/principles/least-privilege>. (URL validated: 2023-04-07) |
| [REF-1237] |
CERT Coordination Center. "Intel BIOS locking mechanism contains race condition that enables write protection bypass". 2015-01-05.
<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/766164/>. |
| [REF-1479] |
Gregory Larsen, E. Kenneth Hong Fong, David A. Wheeler and Rama S. Moorthy. "State-of-the-Art Resources (SOAR) for Software Vulnerability Detection, Test, and Evaluation". 2014-07.
<https://www.ida.org/-/media/feature/publications/s/st/stateoftheart-resources-soar-for-software-vulnerability-detection-test-and-evaluation/p-5061.ashx>. (URL validated: 2025-09-05) |
|
Use of the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE™) and the associated references from this website are subject to the Terms of Use. CWE is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and managed by the Homeland Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute (HSSEDI) which is operated by The MITRE Corporation (MITRE). Copyright © 2006–2026, The MITRE Corporation. CWE, CWSS, CWRAF, and the CWE logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. |
||
