Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1000 CNY

100.0%
Buy Us a Coffee

CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当) — Vulnerability Class 998

998 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-285 represents a critical access control weakness where an application fails to verify whether a user possesses the necessary permissions to access a specific resource or execute a particular action. Attackers typically exploit this vulnerability by manipulating request parameters, such as changing user IDs in URLs or API calls, to bypass security checks and access data belonging to other users or perform administrative tasks. This often leads to severe data breaches or unauthorized system modifications. To prevent such flaws, developers must implement robust, centralized authorization mechanisms that consistently validate user privileges for every sensitive operation. Relying solely on client-side checks is insufficient; instead, server-side enforcement using role-based or attribute-based access control ensures that only authenticated and authorized entities can interact with protected resources, thereby maintaining strict integrity and confidentiality.

MITRE CWE Description
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Common Consequences (3)
ConfidentialityRead Application Data, Read Files or Directories
An attacker could read sensitive data, either by reading the data directly from a data store that is not properly restricted, or by accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality to read the data.
IntegrityModify Application Data, Modify Files or Directories
An attacker could modify sensitive data, either by writing the data directly to a data store that is not properly restricted, or by accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality to write the data.
Access ControlGain Privileges or Assume Identity, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
When access control checks are not applied consistently - or not at all - an attacker could gain privileges and execute unauthorized code or commands by modifying or reading critical data directly, or by accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality.
Mitigations (5)
Architecture and DesignDivide 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.
Architecture and DesignEnsure 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…
Architecture and DesignUse 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].
Architecture and DesignFor 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 …
System Configuration, InstallationUse 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.
Examples (2)
This function runs an arbitrary SQL query on a given database, returning the result of the query.
function runEmployeeQuery($dbName, $name){ mysql_select_db($dbName,$globalDbHandle) or die("Could not open Database".$dbName); //Use a prepared statement to avoid CWE-89 $preparedStatement = $globalDbHandle->prepare('SELECT * FROM employees WHERE name = :name'); $preparedStatement->execute(array(':name' => $name)); return $preparedStatement->fetchAll(); } /.../ $employeeRecord = runEmployeeQuery('EmployeeDB',$_GET['EmployeeName']);
Bad · PHP
The following program could be part of a bulletin board system that allows users to send private messages to each other. This program intends to authenticate the user before deciding whether a private message should be displayed. Assume that LookupMessageObject() ensures that the $id argument is numeric, constructs a filename based on that id, and reads the message details from that file. Also ass…
sub DisplayPrivateMessage { my($id) = @_; my $Message = LookupMessageObject($id); print "From: " . encodeHTML($Message->{from}) . "<br>\n"; print "Subject: " . encodeHTML($Message->{subject}) . "\n"; print "<hr>\n"; print "Body: " . encodeHTML($Message->{body}) . "\n"; } my $q = new CGI; # For purposes of this example, assume that CWE-309 and # CWE-523 do not apply. if (! AuthenticateUser($q->param('username'), $q->param('password'))) { ExitError("invalid username or password"); } my $id = $q->param('id'); DisplayPrivateMessage($id);
Bad · Perl
CVE IDTitleCVSSSeverityPublished
CVE-2020-10716 Red Hat Satellite 安全漏洞 — rubygem-foreman_ansible 6.5 -2021-05-27
CVE-2021-24189 Captchinoo, Google recaptcha for admin login page < 2.4 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — Captchinoo, Google recaptcha for admin login page 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24190 WooCommerce Conditional Marketing Mailer < 1.5.2 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — WooCommerce Conditional Marketing Mailer 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24191 WP Maintenance Mode & Site Under Construction < 1.8.2 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — WP Maintenance Mode & Site Under Construction 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24192 Tree Sitemap < 2.9 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — Tree Sitemap (Pages, Posts & Categories list) 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24193 Visitor Traffic Real Time Statistics < 2.12 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — Visitor Traffic Real Time Statistics 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24194 Login Protection - Limit Failed Login Attempts < 2.9 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — Login Protection – Limit Failed Login Attempts 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24195 Login as User or Customer (User Switching) < 1.9 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — Login as User or Customer (User Switching) 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-24188 WP Content Copy Protection & No Right Click < 3.1.5 - Arbitrary Plugin Installation/Activation via Low Privilege User — WP Content Copy Protection & No Right Click 8.8 -2021-05-14
CVE-2021-28799 Improper Authorization Vulnerability in HBS 3 (Hybrid Backup Sync) — HBS 3 10.0 Critical2021-05-13
CVE-2020-17517 Ozone S3 Gateway allows bucket and key access to non authenticated users — Apache Ozone 7.5 -2021-04-27
CVE-2021-25382 SAMSUNG Mobile devices 安全漏洞 — Samsung Mobile Devices 6.1 Medium2021-04-23
CVE-2021-0260 Junos OS: SNMP fails to properly perform authorization checks on incoming received SNMP requests. — Junos OS 7.3 High2021-04-22
CVE-2021-21096 Adobe Bridge Genuine Software Service Incorrect Permission Assignment could lead to Denial-of-Service — Bridge 5.5 -2021-04-15
CVE-2021-21432 Reject unauthorized access with GitHub PATs — server 7.5 High2021-04-09
CVE-2021-25381 Samsung Account 授权问题漏洞 — Samsung Account 5.5 Medium2021-04-09
CVE-2021-25374 SAMSUNG Mobile devices 安全漏洞 — Samsung Members 8.6 High2021-04-09
CVE-2021-25373 Samsung 多款产品授权问题漏洞 — Customization Service 5.5 Medium2021-04-09
CVE-2021-22865 Improper access control in GitHub Enterprise Server leading to unauthorized read access to private repository metadata — GitHub Enterprise Server 4.3 -2021-04-02
CVE-2021-25355 Samsung Notes 安全漏洞 — Samsung Notes 5.5 Medium2021-03-25
CVE-2021-25354 Samsung Internet 安全漏洞 — Samsung Internet 3.3 Low2021-03-25
CVE-2021-25353 Samsung Galaxy Themes 安全漏洞 — Galaxy Themes 5.5 Medium2021-03-25
CVE-2021-25352 Samsung Bixby Voice 安全漏洞 — Bixby Voice 5.5 Medium2021-03-25
CVE-2021-25351 Samsung EmailValidationView 安全漏洞 — Samsung Account 3.2 Low2021-03-25
CVE-2019-14828 Moodle 授权问题漏洞 — Moodle 4.3 -2021-03-19
CVE-2021-21362 Bypassing readOnly policy by creating a temporary 'mc share upload' URL — minio 7.7 High2021-03-08
CVE-2020-27779 grub2 安全漏洞 — grub2 6.4 -2021-03-03
CVE-2021-22863 Improper access control in GitHub Enterprise Server leading to unauthorized changes to maintainer permissions on pull requests — GitHub Enterprise Server 8.1 -2021-03-03
CVE-2021-22862 Improper access control in GitHub Enterprise Server leading to the disclosure of Actions secrets to forks — GitHub Enterprise Server 6.5 -2021-03-03
CVE-2021-22861 Improper access control in GitHub Enterprise Server leading to unauthorized write access to forkable repositories — GitHub Enterprise Server 4.3 -2021-03-03

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当) represent 998 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.