8 Types of Code Injection and 8 Ways to Prevent Them

What Is Code Injection? 

Code injection is a security vulnerability that allows an attacker to introduce malicious code into a program's execution flow, often bypassing existing security mechanisms. This type of attack occurs when an application improperly handles untrusted data, enabling attackers to alter its intended execution. 

The consequences of code injection attacks can be severe, ranging from unauthorized data access to complete system compromise and data leakage. They can exploit a range of systems, including web applications, desktop software, and enterprise-level services. Preventing and protecting against injection flaws requires vigilance, continuous code review, and runtime protection for production systems.

Such vulnerabilities often arise from neglecting to sanitize input data properly or failing to validate output information, especially in web applications where data may be directly sent from clients to servers. Injection attacks exploit this oversight by introducing code that the application inadvertently executes. 

This is part of a series of articles about application security vulnerabilities

{{expert-tip}}

Impacts and Risks of Code Injection 

Code injection vulnerabilities pose significant risks to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of a system. The impacts vary based on the type of system and the privileges gained by the attacker, but common consequences include:

1. Data exfiltration: Attackers can gain unauthorized access to sensitive information, such as user credentials, financial data, or intellectual property.
2. System compromise: If the injected code grants administrative control or escalates privileges, the attacker can execute arbitrary commands, manipulate system configurations, or even deploy malware.
3. Denial of service (DoS): By injecting malicious code, attackers can disrupt normal application functionality, overload system resources, or crash critical services.
4. Spread of malware: Injection attacks can serve as a vector to introduce worms, ransomware, or trojans into an application or its users’ systems.
5. Compliance violations: Organizations subject to regulatory frameworks such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI DSS may face fines and legal repercussions if a code injection attack results in data exposure.

How Code Injection Works 

Code injection exploits vulnerabilities in the way applications process untrusted data. Below is a step-by-step outline of how this attack typically unfolds:

1. Identifying a vulnerable entry point: The attacker locates input fields or communication channels where user data is processed, such as form fields, API endpoints, or query parameters.
2. Injecting malicious payload: The attacker crafts a payload containing malicious code and submits it through the identified entry point. This payload often mimics valid input but includes executable instructions intended to exploit weak validation or sanitization.
3. Improper handling of input: The application fails to properly validate or sanitize the input, treating the injected payload as legitimate. For example, instead of rejecting or escaping malicious characters, the application processes them directly.
4. Code execution: The injected code is executed by the application or its backend systems. This might involve database operations (e.g., SQL injection), command-line instructions (e.g., shell injection), or script execution (e.g., JavaScript injection in XSS attacks).
5. Exploitation: Once executed, the malicious code carries out its intended operation, such as extracting data, modifying configurations, or compromising system integrity.

Common Types of Code Injection Attacks 

1. SQL Injection

SQL injection (SQLi) involves inserting or “injecting” SQL queries into input fields to manipulate database operations. A common form of attack, SQLi can allow attackers to read sensitive data from databases, execute administrative operations, and destroy data. When inputs are concatenated directly into SQL queries without validation, they become susceptible to SQLi. 

Attackers can use SQLi to bypass authentication procedures or escalate their privileges within an application. For example, by injecting a simple tautology like ' OR '1'='1' in a login field, attackers can potentially log in as the first user in the database. Preventive measures include using prepared statements and parameterized queries, separating SQL logic from user input.

2. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

Cross-site scripting (XSS) refers to the injection of malicious scripts into websites, executed in users' browsers. XSS can be leveraged to steal cookies, session tokens, or deface web pages. Guarding against XSS involves input validation, encoding the output, and implementing content security policy (CSP) headers to constrain what scripts a browser can execute.

For example, displaying user comments without filtering can introduce scripts that run when other users view these comments. This kind of attack bypasses other security mechanisms since it runs on a trusted user session.

3. Command Injection

Command injection attacks occur when an application allows unfiltered user inputs to be executed as commands by the operating system. This can lead to unauthorized file access, data modification, or system compromise. Unlike structured query languages, command injection affects the host system directly. 

Attacks typically involve input fields where software uses shell commands, and the non-sanctioned arbitrary content can lead to serious breaches. Preventative tactics include rigorous input sanitization, employing APIs for system operations, and avoiding unsafe function calls like system() or exec().

4. LDAP Injection

LDAP injection exploits applications that construct LDAP statements based on user input. Unvalidated input can manipulate the LDAP query logic to extract unauthorized information or perform unintended operations on the directory service. 

To defend against LDAP injection, ensure input validation and use parameterized LDAP queries, similar to the techniques employed in preventing SQL injection.

5. Remote File Inclusion

Remote file inclusion (RFI) enables attackers to include remote files into scripts running on a server. If successfully exploited, attackers can execute malicious scripts, potentially leading to data theft and system compromise. This vulnerability commonly arises in web applications that dynamically include files based on user input. 

Attackers typically exploit inclusion functions that incorporate files using user-inputted paths. Employing allowlists and confirming the integrity of files before including them can help mitigate RFI risks.

6. Format String Vulnerabilities

Format string vulnerabilities occur when user inputs control the format functions of code, leading to crashes, data leaks, or code injection. These vulnerabilities are prevalent in languages like C and C++, and they can be particularly destructive, allowing attackers to access program memory or manipulate flow control. 

Unsanitized format strings can affect application behavior, depending on how inputs are handled during runtime activity formatting. Organizations should use input validation and source code audits to detect and prevent these attacks.

7. Object Injection

Object injection is a type of vulnerability where user-inputted code can instantiate objects or classes on the server end. This can lead to unintended access control bypass or malicious object method execution. Object injection is mainly found in languages like PHP, which support serialized objects. 

Attackers often manipulate serialized objects to override class properties or execute critical methods, exploiting business logic vulnerabilities. Mitigating this risk involves strict input validation and using safe object handling techniques.

8. Server-Side Template Injection

Server-side template injection (SSTI) occurs when user inputs are embedded with server-handled templates, mistakenly treated as code due to incorrect template rendering. This opens up opportunities for remote code execution on servers. Secure templating libraries, proper input validation, and separating content from code aid in mitigating SSTI risks.

Attackers exploit dynamic templates to inject payloads interpreted by the server’s template engine. Leveraging safe template libraries and maintaining strict segregation of control and presentation logic are key defenses against SSTI.

Detection Techniques for Code Injection 

Code injection vulnerabilities and exploits are typically identified using static and dynamic security tests and automated detection and response tools.

Static Code Analysis

Static code analysis tools examine source code without executing it, identifying potential injection vulnerabilities early in the development lifecycle. They help pinpoint errors like unsanitized inputs or insecure API use. Automated static analysis tools integrate seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines, enabling developers to detect and rectify flaws before code deployment.

Dynamic Application Security Testing

Dynamic application security testing (DAST) identifies vulnerabilities by executing applications in real-time and monitoring runtime interactions. Unlike static analysis, DAST simulates realistic attack scenarios, probing applications for points where code injection might occur. Regularly performing DAST reinforces security, finding runtime behaviors invisible to static analysis tools.

Application Detection and Response (ADR)

Application Detection and Response (ADR) is a modern approach to identifying and mitigating security threats in real time, helping protect applications from advanced attacks such as code injection. ADR solutions continuously monitor application behavior, detect anomalies, and respond to potential threats by blocking malicious activities or isolating affected components. 

Unlike traditional security tools, ADR focuses on protecting production applications at runtime, addressing vulnerabilities that static or dynamic testing might miss. Implementing ADR complements traditional measures like static and dynamic testing, creating a layered security approach.

7 Best Practices for Preventing Code Injection Attacks

Organizations can significantly reduce the risk of code injection by implementing the following practices.

1. Input Validation and Sanitization

Input validation and sanitization are the most important measures in preventing code injection attacks. Validating inputs means checking inputs for expected types and values, while sanitization demands filtering untrusted data to remove harmful components. 

Validation practices involve using well-established libraries or frameworks that encapsulate input handling best practices. These measures prevent injection attacks by ensuring that only intended inputs are processed. Implement server-side validation as a rule, stripping malicious content from user inputs.

2. Use of Prepared Statements and Parameterized Queries

Prepared statements and parameterized queries are methods that structure parameter handling so that user inputs are automatically treated as data rather than executable code segments. By dissociating code logic from user inputs, developers eliminate the possibility of SQL queries being altered by manipulative inputs.

Unlike traditional query concatenation methods, parameterized queries form part of the query plan without the ability to be modified by input data. Frameworks that support these methodologies intrinsically provide a safer interaction layer with underlying databases. 

3. Implementing Content Security Policy (CSP)

Content security policy (CSP) is a web security standard that helps prevent various forms of injection attacks, including XSS, by controlling what resources can be loaded for different content types. Configuring CSP involves specifying valid content sources, enforcing script execution restrictions, and limiting inline content usage to predefined rulesets.

By structurally segmenting authenticated content from potentially malicious external sources, CSPs provide security against exploitation tactics stemming from compromised inline scripts and styles.

4. Limiting User Privileges

Limiting user privileges is essential in mitigating damage from successful code injection attacks. Applying the principle of least privilege involves allocating minimum permissions necessary for users to perform their functions, significantly reducing vulnerability exposure. 

Ensuring strict privilege allocations across systems involves continuous monitoring and periodic reviews of user roles and associated permissions. Administer distinct access levels based on role requirements, curbing unauthorized actions that might stem from compromised user accounts.

5. Regular Security Audits and Penetration Testing

Regular security audits and penetration testing identify potential vulnerabilities, including injection risks, before they are exploited in real-world scenarios. Penetration testing simulates attacks, revealing gaps in security protocols, while audits assess compliance with established standards and policies. 

Together, these efforts ensure continuous vigilance against emerging threats. Strategy alignment for penetration testing includes defining the scope and establishing clear objectives reflective of an organization’s risk profile. Routine audits assure compliance with both internal security policies and external regulatory demands.

6. Secure Coding Standards and Training

Adopting secure coding standards and ongoing training reduces code injection risks significantly. Standards provide a structured framework for writing resilient code, while training equips developers with skills to recognize and mitigate potential vulnerabilities. 

Secure coding involves enforcing guidelines like avoiding unsafe functions, implementing error handling, and employing validation routines. Regular workshops and certifications in secure coding best practices steer development with security in mind.

7. Using Web Application Firewalls (WAF)

Web application firewalls (WAF) offer an added layer of security by filtering incoming traffic to web applications, blocking malicious requests. WAFs detect and prevent attacks by inspecting HTTP requests for potential code injection patterns, functioning as a frontline defense against threats like SQLi and XSS.

 Implementing WAFs complements intrinsic application security mechanisms, improving “fortress” resilience. The effectiveness of WAFs depends on regular updates to threat detection rules and continuous monitoring. WAF configurations should align with app profiles, accounting for unique traffic patterns to avoid false positives. 

8. Preventing Code Execution at Runtime with ADR

Application Detection and Response (ADR) solutions are critical for preventing code execution at runtime by continuously monitoring application behavior and identifying malicious patterns. ADR tools detect anomalies, such as unexpected function calls or unvalidated inputs triggering execution flows, and block potentially harmful activities before they can be exploited. By focusing on real-time detection, ADR effectively prevents attackers from executing injected code, even in cases where static or dynamic testing might miss a vulnerability.

Implementing ADR complements other preventive measures by providing runtime protection against advanced threats. These tools integrate with production environments to isolate suspicious processes, enforce execution policies, and provide actionable insights for response. Leveraging ADR ensures an additional safety net, reducing the likelihood of successful exploitation while maintaining the integrity and availability of critical systems.

Learn more in our detailed guide to code execution vulnerability.

Preventing Code Injection with Oligo Security

The rapid growth of code injection vulnerabilities and increasingly sophisticated attack methods mean traditional security approaches such as static analysis and web application firewalls (WAFs) are no longer sufficient. Oligo Security's Cloud Application Detection and Response (CADR) solution provides advanced runtime protection by continuously profiling and analyzing application behavior to detect anomalies and prevent code injection exploits in real time. By embedding directly into the application's runtime environment, Oligo CADR delivers proactive defense, stopping attacks before damage occurs.

Request a demo or explore our CADR solution page to discover how Oligo enhances runtime protection against code injection attacks.