CWE-763: Release of Invalid Pointer or Reference

Description:
The product attempts to return a memory resource to the system, but it calls the wrong release function or calls the appropriate release function incorrectly.

Extended Description:
This weakness can take several forms, such as: 
                
                   The memory was allocated, explicitly or implicitly, via one memory management method and deallocated using a different, non-compatible function (CWE-762). 
                   The function calls or memory management routines chosen are appropriate, however they are used incorrectly, such as in CWE-761.

Affected languages: Memory-Unsafe, C, C++
Parent weaknesses: CWE-404, CWE-404, CWE-404

Consequences:
  - Integrity: Modify Memory

Detection methods:
  - Fuzzing: Fuzz testing (fuzzing) is a powerful technique for generating large numbers of diverse inputs - either randomly or algorithmically - and dynamically invoking the code with those inputs. Even with rand
  - Automated Dynamic Analysis: Use tools that are integrated during
	     compilation to insert runtime error-checking mechanisms
	     related to memory safety errors, such as AddressSanitizer
	     (ASan) for C/C++ [REF-1518] or 

Mitigations:
  - [Implementation] Only call matching memory management functions. Do not mix and match routines. For example, when you allocate a buffer with malloc(), dispose of the original pointer with free().
  - [Implementation] When programming in C++, consider using smart pointers provided by the boost library to help correctly and consistently manage memory.
  - [Architecture and Design] Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. 
                   For example, glibc in Linux provides protection against free of invalid pointers.
  - [Architecture and Design] Use a language that provides abstractions for memory allocation and deallocation.

Demonstrative examples:
This code attempts to tokenize a string and place it into an array using the strsep function, which inserts a \0 byte in place of whitespace or a tab character. After finishing the loop, each string in the AP array points to a location within the input string.
Since strsep is not allocating any new memory, freeing an element in the middle of the array is equivalent to free a pointer in the middle of inputstring.
char **ap, *argv[10], *inputstring; for (ap = argv; (*ap = strsep(&inputstring, " \t")) != NULL;) 
                         if (**ap != '\0') if (++ap >= &argv[10]) break; 
                            
                         
                      
                      /.../ free(ap[4]);

This example allocates a BarObj object using the new operator in C++, however, the programmer then deallocates the object using free(), which may lead to unexpected behavior.
Instead, the programmer should have either created the object with one of the malloc family functions, or else deleted the object with the delete operator.
void foo(){ 
                         BarObj *ptr = new BarObj() 
                            /* do some work with ptr here */ 
                            
                            ... 
                            free(ptr); 
                      }
void foo(){ 
                         BarObj *ptr = new BarObj() 
                            /* do some work with ptr here */ 
                            
                            ... 
                         

Real-world examples:
  - CVE-2019-11930: function "internally calls 'calloc' and returns a pointer at an index... inside the allocated buffer. This led to freeing invalid memory."