Home Search Pricing Get inErrata About

Sign in Sign up

Graph/misused-crypto-primitives

AntiPattern

Misused Cryptography Primitives

misused-crypto-primitives

Encryption and credential primitives get conflated—unauthenticated AES-CBC, mishandled IVs/keys, and misinterpreted API-key vs client-presented secrets—so data and authentication integrity are not guaranteed, enabling tampering, interception, or persistent compromise.

Node Details

Public graph metadata

Updated7/26/2026

Connections

30 linked nodes

MATCHESSolution

either your queue isn't set up for SSE-KMS encryption, or your KMS key has the necessary permissions defined in it's key policy — How is the application able to function correctly with the permissions 'reversed' like this? Outcome: your KMS key has the necessary permissions defined in it's key policy.

MATCHESSolution

read access should be done through CloudFront — if you are not directly needing TLS 1.0 or 1.1 for your own application needs. Tension: you are not at further risk of attack from outside entities. Outcome: place other services/protections/permissions in place so that you are not at further risk of attack from outside entities.

MATCHESSolution

when you have a small amount of sensitive data (passwords, credit card info, etc.) — encrypting a lot of data that you're constantly querying. Tension: encrypting a lot of data that you're constantly querying will impact the performance. Outcome: yes, TDE is the best choice because it works in a different way.

MATCHESSolution

you should use the same secret in both places — if you're doing symmetric keys (default in fastendpoints). Tension: signing tokens with one secret and trying to validate incoming tokens with a different secret. Outcome: assymmetric keys is another story which i don't think you need to worry about just yet.

MATCHESSolution

the API keys are stored in an encrypted form — more-annoying techniques (e.g., native code via the NDK). Tension: This too makes it more difficult for an attacker to get the keys. Outcome: but it does not prevent it completely.

MATCHESSolution

requires a valid account, SSL with certificate pinning — to protect your own server API calls. Outcome: This increases the difficulty for an attacker to get the keys.

MATCHESSolution

Choose solutions where the keys reside on your server — your server gets data from the client using your own APIs and forwards it to the third-party service. Tension: To prevent an attacker from getting client-side API keys.

MATCHESSolution

Encrypting the plain text locally and storing the ciphertext remotely is the way to go. — You want to have protection from the remote attackers? Tension: Encryption has never solved any problems for us. It has just shifted the problems somewhere else. Outcome: protection from remote attackers is doable.

MATCHESSolution

Use Hash-Based Message Authentication Code or any cryptographic library or built-in .NET classes

MATCHESSolution

Do not encode the secret for hiding; instead use ConvertAPI authentication with a proper token/credentials designed for client use, e.g., provide an apiKey plus a valid ConvertAPI token in the request (or move credential handling to a backend if needed).

MATCHESSolution

PKCE is verified on the authorization server — even if the clients does not properly (or fail to) verify the state/nonce. Tension: PKCE will still protect them. Outcome: PKCE will still protect them.

MATCHESSolution

I would simply hold the secrets in memory — Based on the logic here. Tension: reading secrets every time disrupts availability. Outcome: I would also update the threat analysis if I get insight into new threats that appear in the future.

MATCHESSolution

Using the platform provided protection usually makes sense — Using the platform provided protection usually makes sense; it is pretty hard to securely store the encryption key within an application after all. Tension: it is pretty hard to securely store the encryption key within an application after all. Outcome: destroy the (copies of) the unencrypted key / passphrase after provisioning / use.

MATCHESSolution

pass `False` if you're not using the algorithm for security purposes. — False indicates that the hashing algorithm is not used in a security context. Tension: Insecure algorithms are enabled by default. Outcome: Python will tell OpenSSL to allow insecure algorithms anyway.

MATCHESSolution

As a default and mainstream solution I would use a BFF that issues short lived access tokens in HTTP only cookies — When a browser tab is closed, it must not be possible for its API credential to be abused by malicious sites. Tension: These should also use the `SameSite=strict` property, for the best protection against cookie misuse via cross site request forgery. Outcome: These should also use the `SameSite=strict` property.

MATCHESSolution

A way to do this (which is used in the wild) is described at — I have a JWKS which exposes my public keyset. Tension: I want to ensure that the keys are not modified in-transit through some man-in-the-middle. Outcome: which would allow clients to verify the jwt's authenticity, and if it's authentic, they could then accept the supplied keys.

MATCHESSolution

Use opaque, signed, time-limited tokens instead of plain email in links, and revalidate any client-provided value on the server

MATCHESSolution

PKCE protects against a specific vulnerability. — if something can intercept the redirect. Tension: the `code` alone is useless because they need the `code_verifier`. Outcome: they need the `code_verifier` which lives in the app that originally initiated the `authorization_code` flow.

MATCHESSolution

Your hardware token idea is the only thing you've listed that is plausible — assuming the token's hardware has its own clock and is hardened against tampering. Tension: There is no way to trust hardware that someone else controls. Outcome: This is just a computer that you trust because the user does not control it.

MATCHESSolution

From the moment you use HTTPS the communication between your mobile app and server is private — make private the communication between my mobile application and my server. Tension: someone can intercepts http calls and copy the static token. Outcome: unless a MitM attack is being carried out successfully by an attacker.

MATCHESSolution

If you want to keep a key secret safe — wallet secrets. Tension: developers often have more access rights than they should have. Outcome: export it to a USB drive, or print it out on a piece of paper and put it in a safe!

MATCHESSolution

protecting the individual endpoints properly. Tension: data from the frontend can and shouldn't be trusted from a security perspective. Outcome: you're already taking the proper countermeasures.

MATCHESSolution

Use protected mode and access tokens so attempts to read protected memory raise an exception instead of exposing decrypted data

MATCHESSolution

If you want to have e.g. functionality such as signed (and/or encrypted) email then you'd use a higher level protocol such as PKCS#7 — If you want to have e.g. functionality such as signed (and/or encrypted) email. Tension: CMS supports both encryption (enveloped data) and signatures. Outcome: you can simply base64 encode it.

MATCHESSolution

Browsers themselves provide an encryption interface. That interface supports AES-GCM — You mention using the private key. Tension: WebAuthn does not currently provide any symmetric key that can be used for encryption. Outcome: You would need to download Chr.

MATCHESSolution

you should consider using community-driven packages built for this kind of thing — Typically, any attempt at solving XSS attacks yourself should be avoided. Tension: they will find these pseudo-protocol calls. Outcome: as they will find these pseudo-protocol calls and santize/strip them for you.

MATCHESSolution

Replicate the Java key-derivation step in C# (same KDF type, salt/password handling, iteration count, and derived key length) before initializing AES/GCM with the derived key. After matching the derivation and parameters, decrypt successfully.

MATCHESSolution

Solution: — leveraging Spring Security for Authentication. Tension: The process to decrypt the token and add it to the request is pretty nasty. Outcome: I worked around the issue and got it working.

MATCHESSolution

Make the primary install command prompt securely via `/dev/tty` (`curl ... | bash`) — The install instructions also pushed users toward passing an API key inline. Tension: keep `--key` as an optional low-friction path.

MATCHESSolution

The vulnerability requires sanitizing URLs before storing them in extended attributes — extended file attributes (xattr) using the --xattr option. Tension: URLs frequently contain sensitive data such as API keys, authentication tokens, session IDs, OAuth credentials, or authentication credentials.

[inerrata]Tags Knowledge Graph Docs About Team Pricing Contact Report a Bug Privacy Terms Cookie Settings Do Not Sell or Share My Info

© 2026 Inerrata