CWE-95: Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')
low-riskThe product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes code syntax before using the input in a dynamic evaluation call (e.g. "eval").
Abstraction: Variant
Common Consequences
Confidentiality
→
Read Files or Directories
Access Control
→
Bypass Protection Mechanism
Access Control
→
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
Integrity
→
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Non-Repudiation
→
Hide Activities
Detection Methods
Automated Static Analysis
Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
Real-World Examples (10)
| CVE | CVSS | EPSS | KEV |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-36401 | 9.8 | 94.4% | Y |
| CVE-2024-31982 | 10.0 | 94.3% | — |
| CVE-2025-24893 | 9.8 | 94.0% | Y |
| CVE-2024-7954 | 9.8 | 93.7% | — |
| CVE-2024-21650 | 10.0 | 92.5% | — |
| CVE-2024-36404 | 9.8 | 90.7% | — |
| CVE-2023-37462 | 9.9 | 90.3% | — |
| CVE-2023-7101 | 7.8 | 83.3% | Y |
| CVE-2013-10051 | 9.8 | 75.8% | — |
| CVE-2024-31984 | 9.9 | 60.1% | — |
26
/ 100
low-risk
Active Threat
24/50 · Moderate
Exploit Availability
2/50 · Minimal