Sensitive data in errors, debug routes, or generated files
An error or debug output crosses a confidentiality boundary by revealing protected state.
Candidate CWE: CWE-209
Test hypothesis#
Send one malformed request for a synthetic object and compare it with the successful request. Identify a private marker, secret-bearing configuration, or privileged internal artifact in the response. If access is through a backup or debug file instead of an error message, map that actual exposure cause.
Evidence required#
Retain the exact request, redacted output, marker ownership, and intended confidentiality rule. Explain how the disclosed value enables the claimed impact without gathering unrelated records.
Rule out false positives#
A generic stack trace, version banner, local path, or public schema can be only informational; it does not automatically prove sensitive-data exposure or code execution.
Playbook and command references#
- Source review: entry point to protected operation — Trace attacker control and authorization through handlers, services, queues, and sensitive operations; promote only reachable violations of a stated invariant.
- Uploads, downloads, paths, archives, and XML — Follow a file through acceptance, storage, processing, publication, and retrieval while preserving ownership and path boundaries.
Find the associated command snippets
Referenced by these target playbooks#
Report checklist#
- Capture the affected version, configuration, identities, and object ownership.
- Preserve a valid baseline and a negative control.
- Reproduce the forbidden data access, action, or state change on controlled fixtures.
- Explain the intended security rule and why the observed behavior violates it.
- State prerequisites, uncertainty, cleanup, and the smallest demonstrated impact.
Conditional ATT&CK mapping#
No direct ATT&CK mapping selected. Record the weakness and demonstrated impact without forcing an adversary-behavior classification. See the mapping guide.