Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-484

Allowed

Omitted Break Statement in Switch

Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft

The product omits a break statement within a switch or similar construct, causing code associated with multiple conditions to execute. This can cause problems when the programmer only intended to execute code associated with one condition.

3 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

CVE-2026-44075 (GCVE-0-2026-44075)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-21 08:14 – Updated: 2026-05-21 12:50
VLAI
Title
Missing break in DSI OpenSession
Summary
A missing break statement in DSI OpenSession processing in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 causes a DSIOPT_ATTNQUANT switch case to fall through into DSIOPT_SERVQUANT, resulting in unintended session option handling that may allow a remote attacker to cause a minor service disruption via crafted DSI session options.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
  • CWE-484 - Omitted Break Statement in Switch
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
Netatalk Netatalk Affected: 1.5.0 , ≤ 4.4.2 (semver)
Unaffected: 4.5.0 (semver)
Create a notification for this product.
Date Public
2026-05-13 00:00
Credits
Arjun Basnet from Securin
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-44075",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-05-21T12:50:45.834277Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-05-21T12:50:52.921Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Netatalk",
          "vendor": "Netatalk",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "4.4.2",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "1.5.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "4.5.0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Arjun Basnet from Securin"
        }
      ],
      "datePublic": "2026-05-13T00:00:00.000Z",
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "A missing break statement in DSI OpenSession processing in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 causes a DSIOPT_ATTNQUANT switch case to fall through into DSIOPT_SERVQUANT, resulting in unintended session option handling that may allow a remote attacker to cause a minor service disruption via crafted DSI session options."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 3.7,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-484",
              "description": "Omitted Break Statement in Switch",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-05-21T08:23:44.721Z",
        "orgId": "33c584b5-0579-4c06-b2a0-8d8329fcab9c",
        "shortName": "securin"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "Netatalk Security Advisory CVE-2026-44075",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://netatalk.io/security/CVE-2026-44075"
        }
      ],
      "title": "Missing break in DSI OpenSession"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "33c584b5-0579-4c06-b2a0-8d8329fcab9c",
    "assignerShortName": "securin",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-44075",
    "datePublished": "2026-05-21T08:14:41.523Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-05-05T07:25:20.197Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-05-21T12:50:52.921Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

GHSA-7MXX-3CGM-XXV3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-24 16:31 – Updated: 2025-03-24 18:41
VLAI
Summary
API Platform Core does not call GraphQl securityAfterResolver
Details

Summary

A security check that gets called after GraphQl resolvers is always replaced by another one as there's no break in this clause: https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444/files#diff-09e3c2cfe12a2ce65bd6c983c7ca6bfcf783f852b8d0554bb938e8ebf5e5fa65R56

https://github.com/soyuka/core/blob/7e2e8f9ff322ac5f6eb5f65baf432bffdca0fd51/src/Symfony/Security/State/AccessCheckerProvider.php#L49-L57

PoC

Create a graphql endpoint with a security after resolver.

Impact

As this fallsback to security, the impact is there only when there's only a security after resolver and none inside security. The test at https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444 is probably broken.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "api-platform/core"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "3.3.8"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.3.15"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-23204"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-20",
      "CWE-484"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-03-24T16:31:08Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-03-24T16:15:56Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nA security check that gets called after GraphQl resolvers is always replaced by another one as there\u0027s no break in this clause: https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444/files#diff-09e3c2cfe12a2ce65bd6c983c7ca6bfcf783f852b8d0554bb938e8ebf5e5fa65R56\n\nhttps://github.com/soyuka/core/blob/7e2e8f9ff322ac5f6eb5f65baf432bffdca0fd51/src/Symfony/Security/State/AccessCheckerProvider.php#L49-L57 \n\n### PoC\n\nCreate a graphql endpoint with a security after resolver.\n\n### Impact\n\nAs this fallsback to `security`, the impact is there only when there\u0027s only a security after resolver and none inside security. The test at https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444 is probably broken.",
  "id": "GHSA-7mxx-3cgm-xxv3",
  "modified": "2025-03-24T18:41:25Z",
  "published": "2025-03-24T16:31:08Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/api-platform/core/security/advisories/GHSA-7mxx-3cgm-xxv3"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-23204"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/api-platform/core/pull/6444/files#diff-09e3c2cfe12a2ce65bd6c983c7ca6bfcf783f852b8d0554bb938e8ebf5e5fa65R56"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/api-platform/core/commit/dc4fc84ba93e22b4f44a37e90a93c6d079c1c620"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/api-platform/core"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/soyuka/core/blob/7e2e8f9ff322ac5f6eb5f65baf432bffdca0fd51/src/Symfony/Security/State/AccessCheckerProvider.php#L49-L57"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "API Platform Core does not call GraphQl securityAfterResolver"
}

GHSA-8QF9-M7WH-563J

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-21 09:32 – Updated: 2026-05-21 09:32
VLAI
Details

A missing break statement in DSI OpenSession processing in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 causes a DSIOPT_ATTNQUANT switch case to fall through into DSIOPT_SERVQUANT, resulting in unintended session option handling that may allow a remote attacker to cause a minor service disruption via crafted DSI session options.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-44075"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-484"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-21T09:16:29Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "A missing break statement in DSI OpenSession processing in Netatalk 1.5.0 through 4.4.2 causes a DSIOPT_ATTNQUANT switch case to fall through into DSIOPT_SERVQUANT, resulting in unintended session option handling that may allow a remote attacker to cause a minor service disruption via crafted DSI session options.",
  "id": "GHSA-8qf9-m7wh-563j",
  "modified": "2026-05-21T09:32:12Z",
  "published": "2026-05-21T09:32:12Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44075"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://netatalk.io/security/CVE-2026-44075"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation
Implementation

Omitting a break statement so that one may fall through is often indistinguishable from an error, and therefore should be avoided. If you need to use fall-through capabilities, make sure that you have clearly documented this within the switch statement, and ensure that you have examined all the logical possibilities.

Mitigation
Implementation

The functionality of omitting a break statement could be clarified with an if statement. This method is much safer.

No CAPEC attack patterns related to this CWE.