CWE-327 is Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm. The flaw arises when the product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol. The database currently holds 75 vulnerabilities mapped to CWE-327 and none of them are in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
A short verification protects the official data source and prevents automated AI abuse.
Verifying...
No vulnerability data in CISA KEV for CWE-327
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
Cryptographic algorithms are the methods by which data is scrambled to prevent observation or influence by unauthorized actors. Insecure cryptography can be exploited to expose sensitive information, modify data in unexpected ways, spoof identities of other users or devices, or other impacts.
It is very difficult to produce a secure algorithm, and even high-profile algorithms by accomplished cryptographic experts have been broken. Well-known techniques exist to break or weaken various kinds of cryptography. Accordingly, there are a small number of well-understood and heavily studied algorithms that should be used by most products. Using a non-standard or known-insecure algorithm is dangerous because a determined adversary may be able to break the algorithm and compromise whatever data has been protected.
Since the state of cryptography advances so rapidly, it is common for an algorithm to be considered "unsafe" even if it was once thought to be strong. This can happen when new attacks are discovered, or if computing power increases so much that the cryptographic algorithm no longer provides the amount of protection that was originally thought.
For a number of reasons, this weakness is even more challenging to manage with hardware deployment of cryptographic algorithms as opposed to software implementation. First, if a flaw is discovered with hardware-implemented cryptography, the flaw cannot be fixed in most cases without a recall of the product, because hardware is not easily replaceable like software. Second, because the hardware product is expected to work for years, the adversary's computing power will only increase over time.
| Impact | Scope | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Read Application Data | Confidentiality | The confidentiality of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm. |
| Modify Application Data | Integrity | The integrity of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm. |
| Hide Activities | Accountability, Non-Repudiation | If the cryptographic algorithm is used to ensure the identity of the source of the data (such as digital signatures), then a broken algorithm will compromise this scheme and the source of the data cannot be proven. |
| Method | Approach | Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|
| Automated Analysis | Automated methods may be useful for recognizing commonly-used libraries or features that have become obsolete.False negatives may occur if the tool is not aware of the cryptographic libraries in use, or if custom cryptography is being used. | Moderate |
| Manual Analysis | This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.These may be more effective than strictly automated techniques. This is especially the case with weaknesses that are related to design and business rules. | - |
| Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis Binary / Bytecode simple extractor - strings, ELF readers, etc. | SOAR Partial |
| Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies | SOAR Partial |
| Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Web Application Scanner Web Services Scanner Database Scanners | SOAR Partial |
| Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Man-in-the-middle attack tool ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Framework-based Fuzzer Automated Monitored Execution Monitored Virtual Environment - run potentially malicious code in sandbox / wrapper / virtual machine, see if it does anything suspicious | High |
| Manual Static Analysis - Source Code | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Manual Source Code Review (not inspections) ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source | High |
| Automated Static Analysis - Source Code | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Source code Weakness Analyzer Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer | High |
| Automated Static Analysis | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Configuration Checker | SOAR Partial |
| Architecture or Design Review | According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.) | High |
Below are representative vulnerabilities related to this CWE, prioritized by severity.
CWE™ Program, operated by The MITRE Corporation. Copyright © 2006–2026, The MITRE Corporation. The MITRE Corporation hereby grants you a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use CWE for research, development, and commercial purposes. CWE Terms of Use.
CyStack VulnScan continuously discovers assets, validates vulnerabilities, and helps security teams prioritize remediation across the organization.
Review CyStack's security rating and practical recommendations for websites and edge assets.
Explore cybersecurity research from our team of security specialists.
Browse practical cybersecurity knowledge across CyStack's articles and guides.
en
