CWE-306
AllowedMissing Authentication for Critical Function
Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
3442 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-WQCC-4XM8-JW2J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-16 03:30 – Updated: 2026-01-16 03:30Police Statistics Database System developed by Gotac has a Missing Authentication vulnerability, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to read, modify, and delete database contents by using a specific functionality.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-1019"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-16T03:16:18Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Police Statistics Database System developed by Gotac has a Missing Authentication vulnerability, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to read, modify, and delete database contents by using a specific functionality.",
"id": "GHSA-wqcc-4xm8-jw2j",
"modified": "2026-01-16T03:30:22Z",
"published": "2026-01-16T03:30:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-1019"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.twcert.org.tw/en/cp-139-10638-0e44b-2.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.twcert.org.tw/tw/cp-132-10637-3e4b3-1.html"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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-WQFH-GQ79-J8MF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-08 22:46 – Updated: 2026-06-08 23:47Summary
free5GC's NEF mounts the nnef-callback route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token) is enough to reach the SMF-callback handler -- the callback body is parsed and dispatched into NEF business logic instead of being rejected at the auth boundary. Same root cause as the other NEF SBI findings: the route group is mounted without any inbound auth middleware. NEF does not authenticate the producer NF identity before processing callback content; if an attacker can guess or obtain a valid NotifId, this missing auth boundary lets forged callbacks act on real subscription state. The route group is also reachable even when the runtime ServiceList does not declare it (it lists only nnef-pfdmanagement and nnef-oam).
Details
Validated against the NEF container in the official Docker compose lab.
- Running Docker image: free5gc/nef:v4.2.1
- Docker validation date: 2026-03-11
NEF advertises OAuth2 setting receive from NRF: true, yet the nnef-callback route group is mounted with no inbound auth middleware. The API layer reads the raw request body and deserializes it before any auth check, then the processor looks up subscription state by NotifId.
Code evidence (paths in free5gc/nef):
- Callback route group mounted without auth middleware: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/server.go:64
- Callback route exposed at /notification/smf: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_callback.go:13
- API layer reads raw request bytes and deserializes them before any auth check: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_callback.go:23
- Processor looks up the subscription by NotifId: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/callback.go:13
- NEF context only exposes outbound token acquisition (GetTokenCtx); there is no inbound authorization path: NFs/nef/internal/context/nef_context.go:153
- Config validation only allows nnef-pfdmanagement and nnef-oam: NFs/nef/pkg/factory/config.go:126
PoC
Reproduced against the running NEF at http://10.100.200.19:8000 using a fabricated bearer token.
Send a forged callback request:
curl -i \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
--data '{"notifId":"forged-notif","eventNotifs":[]}' \
http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-callback/v1/notification/smf
Observed output:
HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found
{"title":"Data not found","status":404,"detail":"Subscription is not found"}
The 404 is positive auth-bypass evidence: the request was parsed and dispatched into the callback business handler instead of being rejected at the auth boundary. NEF container logs (docker logs nef) confirm the callback handler was reached:
[INFO][NEF][TraffInfl] SmfNotification - NotifId[forged-notif]
[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 404 | POST | /nnef-callback/v1/notification/smf
Impact
Missing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the NEF nnef-callback SBI route group. This is the trusted ingestion point for SMF -> NEF notifications. The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no auth middleware on the group at all, so every callback endpoint inside this group inherits the missing inbound auth boundary. Severity is scored against the route group's intended capability surface (consume SMF notifications and mutate NEF / downstream subscription state), NOT against the specific PoC where the chosen NotifId happened to be invalid.
Any party that can reach NEF on the SBI can:
- Submit forged SMF callbacks to NEF anonymously, with body content fully controlled by the attacker.
- Reach NEF callback business logic without proving producer NF identity, so any attacker who can guess or obtain a valid NotifId can deliver forged event notifications against real subscription state -- corrupting AF traffic-influence / PFD-management subscription views and the downstream SMF/UPF policy decisions that depend on them.
- Hit any future callback added behind this same route group anonymously, because the auth boundary does not exist for this group.
The nnef-callback route group is also reachable even when the runtime ServiceList does not declare it, so operators relying on ServiceList to disable the service do not actually get that protection.
Affected: free5gc v4.2.1.
Upstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/860 Upstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/nef/pull/24
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/free5gc/nef"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "1.2.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44320"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-08T22:46:37Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-27T17:16:37Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nfree5GC\u0027s NEF mounts the `nnef-callback` route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`) is enough to reach the SMF-callback handler -- the callback body is parsed and dispatched into NEF business logic instead of being rejected at the auth boundary. Same root cause as the other NEF SBI findings: the route group is mounted without any inbound auth middleware. NEF does not authenticate the producer NF identity before processing callback content; if an attacker can guess or obtain a valid `NotifId`, this missing auth boundary lets forged callbacks act on real subscription state. The route group is also reachable even when the runtime `ServiceList` does not declare it (it lists only `nnef-pfdmanagement` and `nnef-oam`).\n\n### Details\nValidated against the NEF container in the official Docker compose lab.\n- Running Docker image: `free5gc/nef:v4.2.1`\n- Docker validation date: 2026-03-11\n\nNEF advertises `OAuth2 setting receive from NRF: true`, yet the `nnef-callback` route group is mounted with no inbound auth middleware. The API layer reads the raw request body and deserializes it before any auth check, then the processor looks up subscription state by `NotifId`.\n\nCode evidence (paths in `free5gc/nef`):\n- Callback route group mounted without auth middleware: `NFs/nef/internal/sbi/server.go:64`\n- Callback route exposed at `/notification/smf`: `NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_callback.go:13`\n- API layer reads raw request bytes and deserializes them before any auth check: `NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_callback.go:23`\n- Processor looks up the subscription by `NotifId`: `NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/callback.go:13`\n- NEF context only exposes outbound token acquisition (`GetTokenCtx`); there is no inbound authorization path: `NFs/nef/internal/context/nef_context.go:153`\n- Config validation only allows `nnef-pfdmanagement` and `nnef-oam`: `NFs/nef/pkg/factory/config.go:126`\n\n### PoC\nReproduced against the running NEF at `http://10.100.200.19:8000` using a fabricated bearer token.\n\nSend a forged callback request:\n```\ncurl -i \\\n -H \u0027Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token\u0027 \\\n -H \u0027Content-Type: application/json\u0027 \\\n --data \u0027{\"notifId\":\"forged-notif\",\"eventNotifs\":[]}\u0027 \\\n http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-callback/v1/notification/smf\n```\n\nObserved output:\n```\nHTTP/1.1 404 Not Found\n{\"title\":\"Data not found\",\"status\":404,\"detail\":\"Subscription is not found\"}\n```\n\nThe `404` is positive auth-bypass evidence: the request was parsed and dispatched into the callback business handler instead of being rejected at the auth boundary. NEF container logs (`docker logs nef`) confirm the callback handler was reached:\n```\n[INFO][NEF][TraffInfl] SmfNotification - NotifId[forged-notif]\n[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 404 | POST | /nnef-callback/v1/notification/smf\n```\n\n### Impact\nMissing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the NEF `nnef-callback` SBI route group. This is the trusted ingestion point for SMF -\u003e NEF notifications. The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no auth middleware on the group at all, so every callback endpoint inside this group inherits the missing inbound auth boundary. Severity is scored against the route group\u0027s intended capability surface (consume SMF notifications and mutate NEF / downstream subscription state), NOT against the specific PoC where the chosen `NotifId` happened to be invalid.\n\nAny party that can reach NEF on the SBI can:\n- Submit forged SMF callbacks to NEF anonymously, with body content fully controlled by the attacker.\n- Reach NEF callback business logic without proving producer NF identity, so any attacker who can guess or obtain a valid `NotifId` can deliver forged event notifications against real subscription state -- corrupting AF traffic-influence / PFD-management subscription views and the downstream SMF/UPF policy decisions that depend on them.\n- Hit any future callback added behind this same route group anonymously, because the auth boundary does not exist for this group.\n\nThe `nnef-callback` route group is also reachable even when the runtime `ServiceList` does not declare it, so operators relying on `ServiceList` to disable the service do not actually get that protection.\n\nAffected: free5gc v4.2.1.\n\nUpstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/860\nUpstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/nef/pull/24",
"id": "GHSA-wqfh-gq79-j8mf",
"modified": "2026-06-08T23:47:16Z",
"published": "2026-05-08T22:46:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/security/advisories/GHSA-wqfh-gq79-j8mf"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44320"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/860"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/free5gc/nef/pull/24"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "free5GC\u0027s NEF nnef-callback route group is unauthenticated; forged callback requests are accepted into the processing path"
}
GHSA-WR22-69C2-F45V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-04 00:30 – Updated: 2026-02-04 00:30The Synectix LAN 232 TRIO 3-Port serial to ethernet adapter exposes its web management interface without requiring authentication, allowing unauthenticated users to modify critical device settings or factory reset the device.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-1633"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-04T00:16:08Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The Synectix LAN 232 TRIO 3-Port serial to ethernet adapter exposes its web management interface without requiring authentication, allowing unauthenticated users to modify critical device settings or factory reset the device.",
"id": "GHSA-wr22-69c2-f45v",
"modified": "2026-02-04T00:30:30Z",
"published": "2026-02-04T00:30:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-1633"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/cisagov/CSAF/blob/develop/csaf_files/OT/white/2026/icsa-26-034-04.json"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-26-034-04"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/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-WR2V-9RPQ-C35Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-31 00:21 – Updated: 2024-01-31 00:21Vulnerability type
Cryptography
Workarounds
Refer to the gateway documentation. The vulnerability was spotted due to unclear documentation of how the gateway handles endpoints validation.
Detail
When starting a gateway, TLS authentication will only be attempted on endpoints identified in DNS SRV records for a given domain, which occurs in the discoverEndpoints function. No authentication is performed against endpoints provided in the --endpoints flag. The auditors has noted that appropriate documentation of this validation functionality plus deprecation of this misleading functionality is an acceptable path forward.
References
Find out more on this vulnerability in the security audit report
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Contact the etcd security committee
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.4.9"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "go.etcd.io/etcd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.4.0-rc.0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.4.10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "go.etcd.io/etcd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.3.23"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-15136"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287",
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-01-31T00:21:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2020-08-06T23:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Vulnerability type\nCryptography\n\n### Workarounds\nRefer to the [gateway documentation](https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/master/Documentation/op-guide/gateway.md). The vulnerability was spotted due to unclear documentation of how the gateway handles endpoints validation.\n\n### Detail\nWhen starting a gateway, TLS authentication will only be attempted on endpoints identified in DNS SRV records for a given domain, which occurs in the discoverEndpoints function. No authentication is performed against endpoints provided in the --endpoints flag. The auditors has noted that appropriate documentation of this validation functionality plus deprecation of this misleading functionality is an acceptable path forward.\n \n### References\nFind out more on this vulnerability in the [security audit report](https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/master/security/SECURITY_AUDIT.pdf)\n\n### For more information\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Contact the [etcd security committee](https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/master/security/security-release-process.md#product-security-committee-psc)",
"id": "GHSA-wr2v-9rpq-c35q",
"modified": "2024-01-31T00:21:56Z",
"published": "2024-01-31T00:21:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/security/advisories/GHSA-wr2v-9rpq-c35q"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-15136"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/master/Documentation/op-guide/gateway.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/L6B6R43Y7M3DCHWK3L3UVGE2K6WWECMP"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Etcd Gateway TLS authentication only applies to endpoints detected in DNS SRV records"
}
GHSA-WR36-4M3G-VX95
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-18 18:31 – Updated: 2026-03-18 18:31The "Privileged Helper" component of the Arturia Software Center (MacOS) does not perform sufficient client code signature validation when a client connects. This leads to an attacker being able to connect to the helper and execute privileged actions leading to local privilege escalation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-24062"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T16:16:26Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The \"Privileged Helper\" component of the Arturia Software Center (MacOS) does not perform sufficient client code signature validation when a client connects.\u00a0This leads to an attacker being able to connect to the helper and execute privileged actions leading to local privilege escalation.",
"id": "GHSA-wr36-4m3g-vx95",
"modified": "2026-03-18T18:31:15Z",
"published": "2026-03-18T18:31:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24062"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://r.sec-consult.com/arturia"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-WR93-5PFW-4C2V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-15 12:30 – Updated: 2025-01-24 09:30An unauthenticated remote attacker can get read access to files in the "/tmp" directory due to missing authentication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-45276"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306",
"CWE-552"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-10-15T11:15:12Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An unauthenticated remote attacker can get read access to files in the \"/tmp\" directory due to missing authentication.",
"id": "GHSA-wr93-5pfw-4c2v",
"modified": "2025-01-24T09:30:44Z",
"published": "2024-10-15T12:30:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45276"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert.vde.com/en/advisories/VDE-2024-056"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert.vde.com/en/advisories/VDE-2024-066"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.syss.de/fileadmin/dokumente/Publikationen/Advisories/SYSS-2024-065.txt"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-WRX7-MG98-47QJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-18 15:30 – Updated: 2025-11-18 15:30A missing authentication enforcement vulnerability exists in the mutual TLS (mTLS) implementation used by System REST APIs and SOAP services in multiple WSO2 products. Due to improper validation of client certificate–based authentication in certain default configurations, the affected components may permit unauthenticated requests even when mTLS is enabled. This condition occurs when relying on the default mTLS settings for System REST APIs or when the mTLS authenticator is enabled for SOAP services, causing these interfaces to accept requests without enforcing additional authentication.
Successful exploitation allows a malicious actor with network access to the affected endpoints to gain administrative privileges and perform unauthorized operations. The vulnerability is exploitable only when the impacted mTLS flows are enabled and accessible in a given deployment. Other certificate-based authentication mechanisms such as Mutual TLS OAuth client authentication and X.509 login flows are not affected, and APIs served through the API Gateway of WSO2 API Manager remain unaffected.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-9312"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-18T15:16:38Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A missing authentication enforcement vulnerability exists in the mutual TLS (mTLS) implementation used by System REST APIs and SOAP services in multiple WSO2 products. Due to improper validation of client certificate\u2013based authentication in certain default configurations, the affected components may permit unauthenticated requests even when mTLS is enabled. This condition occurs when relying on the default mTLS settings for System REST APIs or when the mTLS authenticator is enabled for SOAP services, causing these interfaces to accept requests without enforcing additional authentication.\n\nSuccessful exploitation allows a malicious actor with network access to the affected endpoints to gain administrative privileges and perform unauthorized operations. The vulnerability is exploitable only when the impacted mTLS flows are enabled and accessible in a given deployment. Other certificate-based authentication mechanisms such as Mutual TLS OAuth client authentication and X.509 login flows are not affected, and APIs served through the API Gateway of WSO2 API Manager remain unaffected.",
"id": "GHSA-wrx7-mg98-47qj",
"modified": "2025-11-18T15:30:56Z",
"published": "2025-11-18T15:30:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9312"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.docs.wso2.com/en/latest/security-announcements/security-advisories/2025/WSO2-2025-4494"
}
],
"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-WVFH-FC5M-V972
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:02 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:02In multiple managed switches by WAGO in different versions without authorization and with specially crafted packets it is possible to create users.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-20998"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-05-13T14:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "In multiple managed switches by WAGO in different versions without authorization and with specially crafted packets it is possible to create users.",
"id": "GHSA-wvfh-fc5m-v972",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:02:22Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:02:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-20998"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cert.vde.com/en-us/advisories/vde-2021-013"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-WVHJ-3792-HF6C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-09 03:30 – Updated: 2026-04-08 18:33The CE21 Suite plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authentication bypass in versions up to, and including, 2.2.0. This is due to hardcoded encryption key in the 'ce21_authentication_phrase' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to log in as any existing user on the site, such as an administrator, if they have access to the email.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-10284"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-288",
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-09T03:15:03Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The CE21 Suite plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authentication bypass in versions up to, and including, 2.2.0. This is due to hardcoded encryption key in the \u0027ce21_authentication_phrase\u0027 function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to log in as any existing user on the site, such as an administrator, if they have access to the email.",
"id": "GHSA-wvhj-3792-hf6c",
"modified": "2026-04-08T18:33:39Z",
"published": "2024-11-09T03:30:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-10284"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/ce21-suite/trunk/single-sign-on-ce21.php?rev=3097700#L242"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3205463/ce21-suite#file3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/45d66743-300e-480d-98b8-99dc30b6e786?source=cve"
}
],
"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-WVMG-W3GM-RJFX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-15 00:30 – Updated: 2025-11-15 00:30Denver SHO-110 IP cameras expose a secondary HTTP service on TCP port 8001 that provides access to a '/snapshot' endpoint without authentication. While the primary web interface on port 80 enforces authentication, the backdoor service allows any remote attacker to retrieve image snapshots by directly requesting the 'snapshot' endpoint. An attacker can repeatedly collect snapshots and reconstruct the camera stream, compromising the confidentiality of the monitored environment.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-4469"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-306"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-14T23:15:42Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Denver SHO-110 IP cameras expose a secondary HTTP service on TCP port 8001 that provides access to a \u0027/snapshot\u0027 endpoint without authentication. While the primary web interface on port 80 enforces authentication, the backdoor service allows any remote attacker to retrieve image snapshots by directly requesting the \u0027snapshot\u0027 endpoint. An attacker can repeatedly collect snapshots and reconstruct the camera stream, compromising the confidentiality of the monitored environment.",
"id": "GHSA-wvmg-w3gm-rjfx",
"modified": "2025-11-15T00:30:26Z",
"published": "2025-11-15T00:30:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-4469"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/50162"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/denver-sho-110-ip-camera-unauthenticated-snapshot-access"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://old.denver.eu/products/smart-home-security/denver-sho-110/c-1024/c-1243/p-3826"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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"
}
]
}
Mitigation
- Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability.
- Identify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the software, to ensure that all channels are appropriately protected, including those channels that are assumed to be accessible only by authorized parties. Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. For example, a login mechanism may be listening on one network port, but after successful authentication, it may open up a second port where it waits for the connection, but avoids authentication because it assumes that only the authenticated party will connect to the port.
- In general, if the software or protocol allows a single session or user state to persist across multiple connections or channels, authentication and appropriate credential management need to be used throughout.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation
- Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment. These capabilities may avoid common weaknesses that are unique to authentication; support automatic auditing and tracking; and make it easier to provide a clear separation between authentication tasks and authorization tasks.
- In environments such as the World Wide Web, the line between authentication and authorization is sometimes blurred. If custom authentication routines are required instead of those provided by the server, then these routines must be applied to every single page, since these pages could be requested directly.
Mitigation MIT-4.5
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 libraries with authentication capabilities such as OpenSSL or the ESAPI Authenticator [REF-45].
Mitigation
When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to require strong authentication for users who should be allowed to access the data [REF-1297] [REF-1298] [REF-1302].
CAPEC-12: Choosing Message Identifier
This pattern of attack is defined by the selection of messages distributed via multicast or public information channels that are intended for another client by determining the parameter value assigned to that client. This attack allows the adversary to gain access to potentially privileged information, and to possibly perpetrate other attacks through the distribution means by impersonation. If the channel/message being manipulated is an input rather than output mechanism for the system, (such as a command bus), this style of attack could be used to change the adversary's identifier to more a privileged one.
CAPEC-166: Force the System to Reset Values
An attacker forces the target into a previous state in order to leverage potential weaknesses in the target dependent upon a prior configuration or state-dependent factors. Even in cases where an attacker may not be able to directly control the configuration of the targeted application, they may be able to reset the configuration to a prior state since many applications implement reset functions.
CAPEC-216: Communication Channel Manipulation
An adversary manipulates a setting or parameter on communications channel in order to compromise its security. This can result in information exposure, insertion/removal of information from the communications stream, and/or potentially system compromise.
CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality
An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.
CAPEC-62: Cross Site Request Forgery
An attacker crafts malicious web links and distributes them (via web pages, email, etc.), typically in a targeted manner, hoping to induce users to click on the link and execute the malicious action against some third-party application. If successful, the action embedded in the malicious link will be processed and accepted by the targeted application with the users' privilege level. This type of attack leverages the persistence and implicit trust placed in user session cookies by many web applications today. In such an architecture, once the user authenticates to an application and a session cookie is created on the user's system, all following transactions for that session are authenticated using that cookie including potential actions initiated by an attacker and simply "riding" the existing session cookie.