By now, you already know how memory corruption in C is a major problem. But… Why is this still happening in 2025? Despite years and years of security patches, best practices, and safer alternatives, memory corruption vulnerabilities continue to dominate exploit kits and fuel large-scale cyberattacks.

‍

Just look at the numbers. Back in 2019, both Microsoft and Google reported that around 70% of all security vulnerabilities they track are related to memory safety issues. Can you imagine how much worse it has become in 2025? Google’s Project Zero has confirmed that memory corruption remains the most exploited class of vulnerabilities. The problem isn’t just big, it’s also systemic.

‍

If your business relies on software written in C (which it probably does), these vulnerabilities are a direct risk to your security, reputation, and bottom line. Attackers love exploiting them because they work, and they’re not going away anytime soon.

Table of Contents

1. What is Memory Corruption in C All About?
2. How Attackers Use Memory Exploits to Take Control of Your Systems
3. Memory Corruption Attacks Can Shut Down Your Business and Cost You Millions
4. How to Stop Memory Corruption Attacks
5. Security Needs to Be Built Into Your Development Process
6. Memory Safety Needs to Be a Priority

‍

What is Memory Corruption in C All About?

C is fast, powerful, and everywhere (as in everywhere). But it doesn’t protect memory automatically. Unlike modern languages that have built-in memory safety, C gives developers full control over memory. That also means one small mistake can break everything.

Why C is vulnerable

C’s flexibility comes at a cost, it doesn’t enforce safety checks at runtime. Here’s why that’s dangerous:

‍

1. No built-in memory safety: C doesn’t check if memory accesses are safe. There’s no automatic bounds checking, no protection against uninitialized reads, and no built-in memory isolation.
2. Manual memory management: Developers manually allocate (malloc) and deallocate (free) memory. Mismanagement leads to leaks, dangling pointers, or use-after-free vulnerabilities.
3. Unchecked array and pointer operations: C allows direct pointer arithmetic and array indexing without boundary checks. Accessing memory out-of-bounds results in corruption or leaks.
4. Type confusion and unsafe typecasting: C allows implicit and explicit type conversions, which can lead to incorrect memory access when pointers are cast between incompatible types.
5. Lack of stack and heap protections by default: Without compiler and runtime mitigations (like stack canaries or ASLR), anyone can predict memory layouts and overwrite sensitive structures.
6. Inline assembly and low-level access: C allows direct interaction with hardware and memory via inline assembly, exposing developers to low-level exploits if misused.

Common memory corruption attack vectors

These are the techniques attackers use to exploit C-based applications:

Buffer Overflows

One of the most well-known attacks, buffer overflows happens when more data is written to a buffer than it can hold

• Stack-based buffer overflows: Overwrites function return addresses, local variables, or saved registers, which allows control flow hijacking.
• Heap-based buffer overflows: Corrupts dynamically allocated memory that can lead to function pointer overwrites, heap metadata corruption, or arbitrary code execution.

Use-After-Free (UAF)

Occurs when memory is accessed after it has been deallocated. Since freed memory can be reallocated for other purposes, an attacker can manipulate the contents and execute arbitrary code.

• Often exploited in browsers and user-space applications where heap allocations are frequent.
• Can be combined with heap spraying to place attacker-controlled data in predictable locations.

Integer Overflows and Underflows

Integer operations that exceed their maximum or minimum values can cause unexpected behavior.

• Integer overflow: Arithmetic operations wrap around, potentially letting an attacker bypass security checks (e.g., size calculations for memory allocations).
• Integer truncation: When a larger integer is cast to a smaller type, data loss can occur, which causes buffer overflows or incorrect logic.

Format String Attacks

Occurs when user-controlled input is passed directly to format functions like printf() without specifying a format string.

• Allows an attacker to read from or write to arbitrary memory locations.
• Can leak stack contents, including return addresses and sensitive data.

Dangling Pointers and Double Free

Accessing or freeing memory that has already been freed can lead to undefined behavior and potential exploitation.

• Dangling pointers: Occur when a pointer is left pointing to freed memory, allowing attackers to modify critical data.
• Double free: Happens when a program frees the same memory block twice, which can corrupt heap metadata and lead to arbitrary code execution.

Out-of-Bounds Reads and Writes

• Out-of-bounds reads: Can lead to information leaks by letting attackers read sensitive data from adjacent memory.
• Out-of-bounds writes: Can overwrite adjacent memory, modifying function pointers, object structures, or other critical data.

Uninitialized Memory Access

Using variables or structures before they are initialized can result in undefined behavior, including leaking sensitive data or introducing predictable execution paths.

• Attackers can spray the heap with controlled values to exploit uninitialized memory reads.

Memory Disclosure Vulnerabilities

• Leaking heap or stack addresses can break Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), making exploits more reliable.
• Use of uninitialized memory in network packets or cryptographic operations can expose sensitive data.

Heap Exploitation Techniques

Attackers leverage heap management weaknesses to gain control over execution flow.

• Heap spraying: Forces attacker-controlled data into predictable locations, increasing exploit reliability.
• Heap metadata corruption: Manipulating heap structures (e.g., unlinking chunks in old malloc implementations) can lead to arbitrary writes.

‍

How Attackers Use Memory Exploits to Take Control of Your Systems

Memory corruption vulnerabilities are entry points for attackers to hijack your systems. Once they find a weakness, they use well-known exploitation techniques to take control, execute arbitrary code, or move deeper into your network.

‍

Below are some of the most effective and widely used techniques that attackers use to exploit memory vulnerabilities.

Stack Smashing

Stack smashing is a classic exploitation technique where an attacker overwrites a function’s return address to redirect execution to malicious code. This is typically achieved through stack-based buffer overflows.

How it works

1. A function allocates a local buffer on the stack but does not properly check input size.
2. The attacker supplies more data than the buffer can hold, causing an overflow.
3. This excess data overwrites the saved return address on the stack.
4. When the function returns, execution jumps to the attacker’s payload, which allows them to execute arbitrary commands.

Real-world example

• Morris Worm (1988): One of the first publicly known stack-smashing attacks that exploited a buffer overflow in the gets() function.
• Blaster Worm (2003): Exploited a buffer overflow in Microsoft’s RPC service that led to widespread infections.

Heap Spraying

Heap spraying is an exploitation technique that increases the likelihood of executing malicious code by filling heap memory with predictable patterns. It is often used in browser exploits and JavaScript-based attacks.

How it works

1. The attacker allocates multiple large heap blocks filled with repeated shellcode.
2. A memory corruption bug (e.g., use-after-free) redirects execution to an address within the heap.
3. Because the heap is filled with the attacker’s shellcode, execution is likely to land on a valid, malicious instruction sequence.

Real-world example

• Internet Explorer and Adobe Flash Exploits: Attackers used heap spraying techniques to reliably execute arbitrary code through memory corruption vulnerabilities.

Return-Oriented Programming (ROP)

Data Execution Prevention (DEP) prevents attackers from executing injected shellcode, and Address space layout randomization (ASLR) randomizes memory addresses to make exploitation harder. ROP circumvents both defenses by chaining together existing code snippets (“gadgets”) within the program’s memory.

How it works

1. The attacker finds ROP gadgets—small instruction sequences that end in RET.
2. They overwrite the saved return address with a pointer to one gadget.
3. They continue chaining gadgets together to build a malicious execution chain.
4. The program executes these pre-existing instructions in unintended ways, effectively running arbitrary code.

Real-world example

• Stuxnet (2010): Used ROP to bypass DEP and execute code on industrial control systems.
• Jailbreaks for iOS: Many relied on ROP to exploit kernel vulnerabilities while bypassing DEP.

Arbitrary Code Execution

The ultimate goal of many memory exploits is arbitrary code execution is to have the ability to execute any command on the system. This is how attackers deploy malware, create backdoors, escalate privileges, or completely take over compromised systems.

How it works

1. A memory corruption vulnerability (e.g., stack overflow, heap overflow, use-after-free) is exploited.
2. The attacker redirects execution to their malicious payload.
3. The payload executes shell commands, spawns a reverse shell, or modifies system files.

Real-world example

• EternalBlue (2017): A remote code execution vulnerability in SMBv1 that allowed self-replicating malware like WannaCry and NotPetya to spread across networks.
• Heartbleed (2014): Although primarily an information disclosure vulnerability, attackers used it to leak sensitive memory contents, leading to further exploitation.

Attackers have refined these exploitation techniques over decades, making memory corruption vulnerabilities one of the biggest risks to software security today. Even with modern defenses like ASLR and DEP, attackers continuously find ways to develop new techniques like ROP and heap spraying to bypass protections.

‍

Memory Corruption Attacks Can Shut Down Your Business and Cost You Millions

Memory corruption vulnerabilities can lead to compliance failures, system outages, and reputational damage. But the real problem is the way these attacks don’t just impact a single system. Instead, it will affect your entire business.

‍

And memory safety isn’t as simple as an issue that your engineering team needs to deal with. Your finances, operations, and legal will all take a massive hit. Let’s break down what that really looks like at scale.

Compliance violations that can lead to fines and legal trouble

If you store customer data, financial information, or healthcare records, a memory corruption attack could put you in direct violation of GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, and other regulations.

‍

• GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation): If an exploit leads to a data breach, you could face fines of up to €20 million or 4% of annual revenue, whichever is higher.
• HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act): A breach involving protected health information (PHI) can result in fines of up to $1.9 million per violation.
• PCI DSS (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard): If attackers exploit a vulnerability to steal credit card data, you could face penalties, lawsuits, and loss of payment processing privileges.

‍

Even if you recover from an attack, compliance violations bring audits, lawsuits, and long-term reputational damage.

Operational downtime that can shut down critical systems

Memory corruption attacks are usually the reason for system crashes, service disruptions, and full-blown outages. If your business relies on uptime, the impact can ruin your entire business.

‍

• Financial institutions: A memory corruption exploit in banking software can take down transaction processing systems, halting payments and ATM services.
• Healthcare organizations: A breach in medical devices or hospital systems can put patient lives at risk by shutting down life-saving equipment.
• Manufacturing and critical infrastructure: Attacks like Stuxnet have shown how memory corruption vulnerabilities can disable industrial control systems, eventually causing a lot of physical damage and massive downtime.

Reputation damage that will destroy your market value

Customers, investors, and regulators don’t care if the exploit was technical. They only care that your security failed. And when customers lose trust, they take their business elsewhere.

‍

• Equifax (2017): A vulnerability led to the exposure of 147 million customer records, resulting in a $700 million settlement and irreparable brand damage.
• WannaCry (2017): Exploited memory corruption in Windows SMBv1 that shut down hospitals, businesses, and government agencies worldwide. The reputational fallout was ridiculous.
• SolarWinds (2020): A supply chain attack leveraging memory vulnerabilities led to nation-state espionage that shook off confidence in enterprise security.

‍

How to Stop Memory Corruption Attacks

Memory corruption vulnerabilities are avoidable… if you have the right defenses in place. Attackers take advantage of bad coding practices, weak compiler settings, and outdated security measures. The good news is you can secure your systems and make exploitation significantly harder. Here’s how:

Secure coding best practices reduce vulnerabilities at the source

Most memory corruption exploits exist because of bad memory management. Secure coding eliminates these risks before they turn into full-blown attacks.

‍

• Use safer functions: Avoid dangerous functions like strcpy(), sprintf(), and gets(). Use strncpy(), snprintf(), or safer alternatives like memcpy_s() that prevent buffer overflows.
• Initialize all pointers: Uninitialized pointers can lead to undefined behavior. Always set pointers to NULL before using them.
• Use smart pointers in C++: std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr automatically manage memory, reducing manual allocation risks.
• Avoid manual memory allocation: Whenever possible, use stack allocation or memory-safe containers like std::vector in C++.

‍

Bad memory management is the root of most security exploits. Fix it at the code level, and you eliminate many attack vectors.

Compiler-based security mechanisms make exploitation harder

Even if developers write secure code, attackers will still try to break it. Compiler security features add extra layers of protection to detect or stop memory corruption exploits.

‍

• Stack Canaries: Special values placed before return addresses detect buffer overflows before they cause damage. If a function overwrites the canary, the program immediately crashes instead of executing attacker code.
• Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR): Randomizes memory addresses so attackers can’t predict where important structures are. This makes buffer overflows and ROP (Return-Oriented Programming) attacks far less reliable.
• Control Flow Integrity (CFI): Stops control hijacking attacks by making sure that functions only return to expected locations.
• Position-Independent Executables (PIE): Randomizes executable memory locations, making it significantly harder for attackers to predict or inject malicious payloads.

‍

If you’re not enabling these security features, you’re making an attacker’s job much easier.

Runtime protection mechanisms catch vulnerabilities before exploits succeed

Even with secure coding and compiler protections, there are still some vulnerabilities that slip through. To avoid this from happening, you can use run-time tools that can detect and mitigate memory corruption.

‍

• Memory Safety Tools:
  
  • AddressSanitizer (ASan): Detects buffer overflows, use-after-free (UAF), and uninitialized reads.
  • Valgrind: Helps identify memory leaks and improper memory accesses.
• Heap Protection Techniques:
  
  • Safe unlinking: Prevents heap-based buffer overflows from corrupting linked lists and function pointers.
  • Guard pages: Inserts inaccessible memory regions around critical buffers to catch overflows.

‍

Using these tools in development and production adds another layer of defense against memory corruption attacks.

Hardware-based mitigations add another layer of security

If exploiting software weaknesses won’t work, attackers could try to bypass hardware-level protections. New processor security features make this significantly harder.

‍

• Data Execution Prevention (DEP/NX Bit): Blocks execution of non-executable memory regions to block stack and heap-based shellcode execution.
• Pointer Authentication Codes (PAC): Hardens return addresses and function pointers against manipulation by cryptographically signing them. Attackers can’t overwrite pointers without breaking authentication.

‍

Modern hardware has built-in security features, but they need to be enabled and configured properly.

‍

Attackers rely on weak memory management, outdated compiler settings, and unprotected runtime environments. By following secure coding practices, enabling compiler defenses, using runtime protections, and leveraging hardware security, you can make memory corruption exploits nearly impossible.

‍

Security Needs to Be Built Into Your Development Process

Just in case someone needs to hear this, but you can’t bolt on security after the fact and expect it to work. A reactive approach means vulnerabilities pile up, attackers exploit them, and your team rushes to clean up the mess. Instead, security should be a proactive, built-in part of your development culture. That means training developers, testing for vulnerabilities early and catching security issues before they make it into production.

Developers need security training to write safer code

Is your engineering team trained in secure coding? Because if not, you’re relying on luck to keep your systems safe. Attackers target common mistakes in memory management, and if developers don’t know what to look for, they will only make matters worse because of all the vulnerabilities that they will keep on introducing.

‍

• Teach engineers how to prevent memory corruption vulnerabilities like buffer overflows and use-after-free.
• Developers need to understand how attackers exploit bad code so they can write software that stops them.
• One-time training isn’t enough. Regular sessions keep teams updated on the latest threats and best practices.

Security audits and penetration testing catch issues before attackers do

Attackers will always find those vulnerabilities that you’re not actively testing for. Security audits and penetration testing help identify weaknesses before they become full-blown breaches.

‍

• Tools like static code analysis catch dangerous memory operations before code is deployed.
• Ethical hackers can find and exploit vulnerabilities before real attackers do.
• Security findings should be prioritized and fixed quickly, not left for later releases.

Shift-left security with threat modeling stops vulnerabilities before they happen

Don’t make the mistake of forgetting about security until the very end of SDLC. By integrating security early in the development lifecycle, you catch vulnerabilities before they’re even written into code.

‍

• Teams analyze how attackers could exploit memory issues before writing a single line of code.
• Security isn’t just the security team’s job. Developers also need to be part of the process from the beginning.
• Catching issues early means less time fixing security bugs later, reducing costs and development delays.

‍

Yes, you need tools, policies, and even firewalls. But security is also about building a culture where security is part of development. Investing in secure coding training, running continuous security tests, and integrating security from day one makes your business much harder to attack.

Memory Safety Needs to Be a Priority

C isn’t going away anytime soon. It powers critical applications in finance, healthcare, infrastructure, and embedded systems. But ignoring memory corruption risks is a mistake that you can’t afford to make. 

‍

Stopping memory corruption attacks is all about layering your defenses. But compiler protections and runtime security measures can only do so much. Investing in good technology is not enough.

‍

Memory safety needs to be baked into your engineering culture. Your developers need to be experts in writing secure code, running security audits and penetration tests regularly, and shifting security left with threat modeling. And the fastest way to do this is by training your developers to write secure code and recognize vulnerabilities before attackers can exploit them. Here at AppSecEngineer, they can get hands-on memory security training that will get them the skills to prevent, detect, and fix memory corruption issues with real-world exercises.

‍

Book a demo below to start!