CWE-285
DiscouragedImproper Authorization
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
2305 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-G38F-PQR8-74J5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:56 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:59A specific utility may allow an attacker to gain read access to privileged files in the Niagara AX 3.8u4 (JACE 3e, JACE 6e, JACE 7, JACE-8000), Niagara 4.4u3 (JACE 3e, JACE 6e, JACE 7, JACE-8000), and Niagara 4.7u1 (JACE-8000, Edge 10).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-13528"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-09-24T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A specific utility may allow an attacker to gain read access to privileged files in the Niagara AX 3.8u4 (JACE 3e, JACE 6e, JACE 7, JACE-8000), Niagara 4.4u3 (JACE 3e, JACE 6e, JACE 7, JACE-8000), and Niagara 4.7u1 (JACE-8000, Edge 10).",
"id": "GHSA-g38f-pqr8-74j5",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:59:34Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:56:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-13528"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.us-cert.gov/ics/advisories/icsa-19-262-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G459-4FQQ-MR69
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:30 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:30Improper Authorization vulnerability of Pepperl+Fuchs P+F Comtrol RocketLinx ES7510-XT, ES8509-XT, ES8510-XT, ES9528-XTv2, ES7506, ES7510, ES7528, ES8508, ES8508F, ES8510, ES8510-XTE, ES9528/ES9528-XT (all versions) allows unauthenticated device administration.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-12500"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285",
"CWE-306",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-10-15T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Improper Authorization vulnerability of Pepperl+Fuchs P+F Comtrol RocketLinx ES7510-XT, ES8509-XT, ES8510-XT, ES9528-XTv2, ES7506, ES7510, ES7528, ES8508, ES8508F, ES8510, ES8510-XTE, ES9528/ES9528-XT (all versions) allows unauthenticated device administration.",
"id": "GHSA-g459-4fqq-mr69",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:30:43Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:30:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-12500"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert.vde.com/de-de/advisories/vde-2020-040"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sec-consult.com/vulnerability-lab/advisory/multiple-critical-vulnerabilities-in-korenix-technology-westermo-pepperl-fuchs"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/162903/Korenix-CSRF-Backdoor-Accounts-Command-Injection-Missing-Authentication.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/165875/Korenix-Technology-JetWave-CSRF-Command-Injection-Missing-Authentication.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2021/Jun/0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G4M9-5HPF-HX72
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2020-03-30 20:09 – Updated: 2024-02-05 11:13Description
On Symfony before 4.4.0, when a Firewall checks an access control rule (using the unanimous strategy), it iterates over all rule attributes and grant access only if all calls to the accessDecisionManager decide to grant access.
As of Symfony 4.4.0, a bug was introduced that prevents the check of attributes as soon as accessDecisionManager decide to grant access on one attribute.
Resolution
The accessDecisionManager is now called with all attributes at once, allowing the unanimous strategy being applied on each attribute.
The patch for this issue is available here for the 4.4 branch.
Credits
I would like to thank Antonio J. García Lagar for reporting & Robin Chalas for fixing the issue.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/security"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.4.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/security"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/security-http"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.4.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/security-http"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.4.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "symfony/symfony"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-5275"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-03-30T19:45:26Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Description\n-----------\n\nOn Symfony before 4.4.0, when a `Firewall` checks an access control rule (using the unanimous strategy), it iterates over all rule attributes and grant access only if *all* calls to the `accessDecisionManager` decide to grant access.\n\nAs of Symfony 4.4.0, a bug was introduced that prevents the check of attributes as soon as `accessDecisionManager` decide to grant access on one attribute.\n\nResolution\n----------\n\nThe `accessDecisionManager` is now called with all attributes at once, allowing the unanimous strategy being applied on each attribute. \n\nThe patch for this issue is available [here](https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/c935e4a3fba6cc2ab463a6ca382858068d63cebf) for the 4.4 branch.\n\nCredits\n-------\n\nI would like to thank Antonio J. Garc\u00eda Lagar for reporting \u0026 Robin Chalas for fixing the issue.",
"id": "GHSA-g4m9-5hpf-hx72",
"modified": "2024-02-05T11:13:15Z",
"published": "2020-03-30T20:09:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/security/advisories/GHSA-g4m9-5hpf-hx72"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-5275"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/symfony/symfony/commit/c935e4a3fba6cc2ab463a6ca382858068d63cebf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/symfony/security-http/CVE-2020-5275.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/symfony/security/CVE-2020-5275.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/symfony/symfony/CVE-2020-5275.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/C36JLPHUPKDFAX6D5WYFC4ALO2K7RDUQ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://symfony.com/cve-2020-5275"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Firewall configured with unanimous strategy was not actually unanimous in Symfony"
}
GHSA-G4V5-6F5P-M38J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-19 20:25 – Updated: 2025-02-19 22:39Overview OpenFGA v1.8.4 or previous (Helm chart < openfga-0.2.22, docker < v.1.8.5) are vulnerable to authorization bypass when certain Check and ListObject calls are executed.
Am I Affected? If you are using OpenFGA v1.8.4 or previous, specifically under the following conditions, you are affected by this authorization bypass vulnerability:
- Calling Check API or ListObjects with a model that has a relation directly assignable to both public access AND userset with the same type, and
- A type bound public access tuple is assigned to an object, and
- userset tuple is not assigned to the same object, and
- Check request's user field is a userset that has the same type as the type bound public access tuple's user type
Fix Upgrade to v1.8.5. This upgrade is backwards compatible.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.8.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/openfga/openfga"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.8.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-25196"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-02-19T20:25:22Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-19T21:15:15Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Overview\nOpenFGA v1.8.4 or previous (Helm chart \u003c openfga-0.2.22, docker \u003c v.1.8.5) are vulnerable to authorization bypass when certain Check and ListObject calls are executed.\n\nAm I Affected?\nIf you are using OpenFGA v1.8.4 or previous, specifically under the following conditions, you are affected by this authorization bypass vulnerability:\n\n- Calling Check API or ListObjects with a model that has a relation [directly assignable](https://openfga.dev/docs/concepts#what-is-a-directly-related-user-type) to both [public access](https://openfga.dev/docs/concepts#what-is-type-bound-public-access) AND [userset](https://openfga.dev/docs/concepts#what-is-a-user) with the [same type](https://openfga.dev/docs/concepts#what-is-a-type), and\n- A type bound public access tuple is assigned to an object, and\n- userset tuple is not assigned to the same object, and\n- Check request\u0027s user field is a userset that has the same type as the type bound public access tuple\u0027s user type\n\n\nFix\nUpgrade to v1.8.5. This upgrade is backwards compatible.",
"id": "GHSA-g4v5-6f5p-m38j",
"modified": "2025-02-19T22:39:15Z",
"published": "2025-02-19T20:25:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openfga/openfga/security/advisories/GHSA-g4v5-6f5p-m38j"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-25196"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openfga/openfga/commit/0aee4f47e0c642de78831ceb27bb62b116f49588"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openfga/openfga"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "OpenFGA Authorization Bypass"
}
GHSA-G582-8VWR-68H2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-03 20:13 – Updated: 2025-11-15 02:25Impact
Due to insufficient access-level checks, any non-admin user having access to manage_config_columns_page.php (typically project managers having MANAGER role) can use the Copy From action to retrieve the columns configuration from a private project they have no access to.
Access to the reverse operation (Copy To) is correctly controlled, i.e. it is not possible to alter the private project's configuration.
Patches
The vulnerability will be fixed in MantisBT version 2.27.2.
Workarounds
None
Credits
Thanks to d3vpoo1 for reporting the issue.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "mantisbt/mantisbt"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.27.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-62520"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-11-03T20:13:26Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-04T22:16:38Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nDue to insufficient access-level checks, any non-admin user having access to _manage_config_columns_page.php_ (typically project managers having MANAGER role) can use the _Copy From_ action to retrieve the columns configuration from a private project they have no access to. \n\nAccess to the reverse operation (_Copy To_) is correctly controlled, i.e. it is not possible to alter the private project\u0027s configuration.\n\n### Patches\nThe vulnerability will be fixed in MantisBT version 2.27.2. \n\n### Workarounds\nNone\n\n### Credits\nThanks to [d3vpoo1](https://github.com/jrckmcsb) for reporting the issue.",
"id": "GHSA-g582-8vwr-68h2",
"modified": "2025-11-15T02:25:11Z",
"published": "2025-11-03T20:13:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mantisbt/mantisbt/security/advisories/GHSA-g582-8vwr-68h2"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62520"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mantisbt/mantisbt/commit/4fe94f45fa2baea2aeb4b65781d2009e7b4a0bf3"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mantisbt/mantisbt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mantisbt.org/bugs/view.php?id=36502"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "MantisBT unauthorized disclosure of private project column configuration"
}
GHSA-G5V4-4FXP-3RXP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-15 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-15 00:31A flaw has been found in Moovit Bus & Public Transit App 1.18 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.tranzmate. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper authorization in handler for custom url scheme. The attack can only be executed locally. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12189"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-14T23:16:35Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A flaw has been found in Moovit Bus \u0026 Public Transit App 1.18 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.tranzmate. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper authorization in handler for custom url scheme. The attack can only be executed locally. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-g5v4-4fxp-3rxp",
"modified": "2026-06-15T00:31:50Z",
"published": "2026-06-15T00:31:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12189"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lKtJX8mhbGTiMarv2H3psd9iombJ-dIn/view?usp=sharing"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/honestcorrupt/MOOVIT-CVE-.git"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-12189"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/824449"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/370835"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/370835/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-G677-CG8F-8P94
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-25 03:31 – Updated: 2026-03-25 21:30An authentication issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.7 and iPadOS 18.7.7, iOS 26.4 and iPadOS 26.4, macOS Sequoia 15.7.5, macOS Sonoma 14.8.5, macOS Tahoe 26.4, tvOS 26.4, visionOS 26.4, watchOS 26.4. An attacker in a privileged network position may be able to intercept network traffic.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-28865"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-25T01:17:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An authentication issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.7 and iPadOS 18.7.7, iOS 26.4 and iPadOS 26.4, macOS Sequoia 15.7.5, macOS Sonoma 14.8.5, macOS Tahoe 26.4, tvOS 26.4, visionOS 26.4, watchOS 26.4. An attacker in a privileged network position may be able to intercept network traffic.",
"id": "GHSA-g677-cg8f-8p94",
"modified": "2026-03-25T21:30:31Z",
"published": "2026-03-25T03:31:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28865"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126792"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126793"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126794"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126795"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126796"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126797"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126798"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126799"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G6J3-54G7-68JX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-06 15:32 – Updated: 2025-02-06 15:32Permission verification vulnerability in the media library module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect service confidentiality.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-57954"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-06T13:15:39Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Permission verification vulnerability in the media library module\nImpact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect service confidentiality.",
"id": "GHSA-g6j3-54g7-68jx",
"modified": "2025-02-06T15:32:52Z",
"published": "2025-02-06T15:32:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57954"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://consumer.huawei.com/en/support/bulletin/2025/2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G6PH-2VXQ-M462
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-26 13:30 – Updated: 2026-05-29 18:31Dell Unisphere for PowerMax vApp version prior to 10.0.0.2, contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the Unisphere for VMAX application running in vApp
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-34363"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-22T16:16:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Dell Unisphere for PowerMax vApp version prior to 10.0.0.2, contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the\u00a0 Unisphere for VMAX application running in\u00a0vApp",
"id": "GHSA-g6ph-2vxq-m462",
"modified": "2026-05-29T18:31:15Z",
"published": "2026-05-26T13:30:17Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-34363"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://dellservices.lightning.force.com/lightning/r/Lightning_Knowledge__kav/ka06P000000xAiKQAU/view"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-G82G-3HGJ-8MGJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-09 18:30 – Updated: 2024-07-09 18:30Microsoft Dynamics 365 (On-Premises) Information Disclosure Vulnerability
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-30061"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-07-09T17:15:15Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Microsoft Dynamics 365 (On-Premises) Information Disclosure Vulnerability",
"id": "GHSA-g82g-3hgj-8mgj",
"modified": "2024-07-09T18:30:49Z",
"published": "2024-07-09T18:30:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-30061"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-30061"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
- Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
- Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
Mitigation
Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
Mitigation MIT-4.4
Strategy: 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.
- For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
Mitigation
- For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page.
- One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
Mitigation
Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs
In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.
CAPEC-104: Cross Zone Scripting
An attacker is able to cause a victim to load content into their web-browser that bypasses security zone controls and gain access to increased privileges to execute scripting code or other web objects such as unsigned ActiveX controls or applets. This is a privilege elevation attack targeted at zone-based web-browser security.
CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing
An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.
CAPEC-13: Subverting Environment Variable Values
The adversary directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The adversary's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the adversary.
CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
CAPEC-39: Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data Tokens
In circumstances where an application holds important data client-side in tokens (cookies, URLs, data files, and so forth) that data can be manipulated. If client or server-side application components reinterpret that data as authentication tokens or data (such as store item pricing or wallet information) then even opaquely manipulating that data may bear fruit for an Attacker. In this pattern an attacker undermines the assumption that client side tokens have been adequately protected from tampering through use of encryption or obfuscation.
CAPEC-402: Bypassing ATA Password Security
An adversary exploits a weakness in ATA security on a drive to gain access to the information the drive contains without supplying the proper credentials. ATA Security is often employed to protect hard disk information from unauthorized access. The mechanism requires the user to type in a password before the BIOS is allowed access to drive contents. Some implementations of ATA security will accept the ATA command to update the password without the user having authenticated with the BIOS. This occurs because the security mechanism assumes the user has first authenticated via the BIOS prior to sending commands to the drive. Various methods exist for exploiting this flaw, the most common being installing the ATA protected drive into a system lacking ATA security features (a.k.a. hot swapping). Once the drive is installed into the new system the BIOS can be used to reset the drive password.
CAPEC-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links
This type of attack leverages the use of symbolic links to cause buffer overflows. An adversary can try to create or manipulate a symbolic link file such that its contents result in out of bounds data. When the target software processes the symbolic link file, it could potentially overflow internal buffers with insufficient bounds checking.
CAPEC-5: Blue Boxing
This type of attack against older telephone switches and trunks has been around for decades. A tone is sent by an adversary to impersonate a supervisor signal which has the effect of rerouting or usurping command of the line. While the US infrastructure proper may not contain widespread vulnerabilities to this type of attack, many companies are connected globally through call centers and business process outsourcing. These international systems may be operated in countries which have not upgraded Telco infrastructure and so are vulnerable to Blue boxing. Blue boxing is a result of failure on the part of the system to enforce strong authorization for administrative functions. While the infrastructure is different than standard current applications like web applications, there are historical lessons to be learned to upgrade the access control for administrative functions.
{'xhtml:b': 'This attack pattern is included in CAPEC for historical purposes.'}
CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry
SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-60: Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
CAPEC-647: Collect Data from Registries
An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization to gather system-specific data and sensitive information within a registry (e.g., Windows Registry, Mac plist). These contain information about the system configuration, software, operating system, and security. The adversary can leverage information gathered in order to carry out further attacks.
CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)
An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.
CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls
An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.
CAPEC-77: Manipulating User-Controlled Variables
This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables.
CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing
An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.