Threadlinqs IntelligenceStart free

Weakness · ClassCWE-327

CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

Likelihood of exploit: HighClass

As of 2026-10-05, CWE-327 (Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm) underlies 5 CVEs tracked by Threadlinqs, none of them in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and is cited by 19 tracked threats. MITRE rates its likelihood of exploit as High.

CVEs
5Mapped to CWE-327
CISA KEV
0None listed yet
Critical
0CVSS v3 critical CVEs
Threats
19Tracked campaigns citing it
Likelihood
HighMITRE likelihood of exploit

Last updated:

What is 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.

CWE-327 is a class-level weakness in MITRE’s Common Weakness Enumeration, with a MITRE likelihood of exploit of High. Applicable platforms: Language: Not Language-Specific; Language: Verilog; Language: VHDL; Technology: Not Technology-Specific; Technology: ICS/OT.

Source: MITRE CWE (CWE-327 definition, reproduced verbatim). Counts and linkage below are Threadlinqs data.

Consequences

  • Confidentiality — Read Application Data. The confidentiality of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm.
  • Integrity — Modify Application Data. The integrity of sensitive data may be compromised by the use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm.
  • Accountability, Non-Repudiation — Hide Activities. 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.

Source: MITRE CWE, common consequences.

How CWE-327 is exploited in the wild

Threadlinqs maps 5 CVEs to CWE-327, published between 2026-06-25 and 2026-07-13. None of them is in the CISA KEV catalog yet. By CVSS v3 severity the set splits into 2 medium, 3 low. The highest EPSS score in the set is 0.2% (CVE-2026-13510), the modelled probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. 19 tracked threats reference CWE-327 directly or through a CVE it covers; the most recent is “Forgeable Session Cookie (Hard-Coded HMAC Secret) in Yard Management System Bypasses Entra ID MFA and Enables User and Admin Impersonation” (2026-10-02). Affected products concentrate in CoreWCF (1), SimStudioAI (1), strapi (1), among 4 vendors in total.

Vulnerabilities (CVEs)

All 5 CVEs mapped to CWE-327, CISA KEV first, then by CVSS score.

  • CVE-2026-6330 — CVSS 6.5 medium · EPSS 0.1% · published 2026-06-25
  • CVE-2026-57997 — CVSS 4.8 medium · EPSS 0.1% · published 2026-06-29
  • CVE-2026-13510 — CVSS 3.7 low · EPSS 0.2% · published 2026-06-28
  • CVE-2026-54780 — CVSS 3.7 low · EPSS 0.1% · published 2026-07-08
  • CVE-2026-15605 — CVSS 3.1 low · EPSS 0.1% · published 2026-07-13

Affected vendors

  • CoreWCF — 1 CVE
  • SimStudioAI — 1 CVE
  • strapi — 1 CVE
  • wolfSSL — 1 CVE

Threat activity

19 tracked threats cite CWE-327:

Mitigations

  • Architecture and Design / Libraries or Frameworks: When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations. As with all cryptographic mechanisms, the source code should be available for analysis. For example, US government systems require FIPS 140-2 certification [REF-1192]. Do not develop custom or private cryptographic algorithms. They will likely be exposed to attacks that are well-understood by cryptographers. Reverse engineering techniques are mature. If the algorithm can be compromised if attackers find out how it works, then it is…
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms. With hardware, design the product at the Intellectual Property (IP) level so that one cryptographic algorithm can be replaced with another in the next generation of the hardware product.
  • Architecture and Design: Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
  • Architecture and Design / Libraries or Frameworks: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Industry-standard implementations will save development time and may be more likely to avoid errors that can occur during implementation of cryptographic algorithms. Consider the ESAPI Encryption feature.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: When using industry-approved techniques, use them correctly. Don't cut corners by skipping resource-intensive steps (CWE-325). These steps are often essential for preventing common attacks.

Source: MITRE CWE, potential mitigations.

Detection methods (MITRE CWE)

  • Automated Analysis (effectiveness: Moderate): Automated methods may be useful for recognizing commonly-used libraries or features that have become obsolete.
  • 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.
  • Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode (effectiveness: SOAR Partial): 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.
  • Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode (effectiveness: SOAR Partial): 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
  • Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation (effectiveness: SOAR Partial): 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
  • Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation (effectiveness: High): 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
  • Manual Static Analysis - Source Code (effectiveness: High): 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
  • Automated Static Analysis - Source Code (effectiveness: High): 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

Source: MITRE CWE, detection methods. Threadlinqs detection rules for the threats above are Blue tier and higher.