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 986

986 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-2017-2632 Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine 权限许可和访问控制漏洞 — cfme 7.2 -2018-07-27
CVE-2017-2589 Hawtio servlet 安全漏洞 — hawtio 7.7 -2018-07-26
CVE-2018-10906 Fuse 安全漏洞 — fuse 8.8 -2018-07-24
CVE-2018-0393 Cisco Policy Suite 安全漏洞 — Cisco Policy Suite unknown 4.3 -2018-07-18
CVE-2018-1116 Polkit polkitd 信息泄露漏洞 — polkit 4.4 -2018-07-10
CVE-2018-10861 Red Hat Ceph 安全漏洞 — ceph 8.1 -2018-07-10
CVE-2017-16773 Synology Universal Search Highlight Preview 安全漏洞 — Universal Search 8.8 -2018-07-05
CVE-2018-1113 Fedora和Red Hat Enterprise Linux 访问控制错误漏洞 — setup 6.6 -2018-07-02
CVE-2017-16726 Beckhoff TwinCAT 安全漏洞 — Beckhoff TwinCAT 9.1 -2018-06-27
CVE-2018-1082 Moodle 授权问题漏洞 — Moodle 8.1 -2018-04-04
CVE-2017-0926 GitLab Community Edition Oauth sign-in组件安全漏洞 — GitLab Community and Enterprise Editions 8.8 -2018-03-21
CVE-2017-0927 GitLab Community Edition deployment keys组件安全漏洞 — GitLab Community and Enterprise Editions 6.5 -2018-03-21
CVE-2017-11398 Trend Micro Smart Protection Server(Standalone) 安全漏洞 — Trend Micro Smart Protection Server (Standalone) 8.1 -2018-01-19
CVE-2017-16743 PHOENIX CONTACT FL SWITCH 3xxx、4xxx和48xxx Series产品安全漏洞 — PHOENIX CONTACT FL SWITCH 9.8 -2018-01-12
CVE-2017-12160 Keycloak oauth 安全漏洞 — keycloak 7.2 -2017-10-26
CVE-2017-1002151 Pagure 安全漏洞 — Pagure 5.3 -2017-09-14
CVE-2017-6044 Sierra Wireless AirLink Raven XE和XT 授权问题漏洞 — Sierra Wireless AirLink Raven XE and XT 9.8 -2017-06-30
CVE-2017-0896 Zulip Server 安全漏洞 — Zulip Server 4.3 -2017-06-02
CVE-2017-7484 PostgreSQL 信息泄露漏洞 — PostgreSQL 7.5 -2017-05-12
CVE-2017-0892 Nextcloud Server 安全漏洞 — Nextcloud Server 6.5 -2017-05-08
CVE-2017-0894 Nextcloud Server 信息泄露漏洞 — Nextcloud Server 5.3 -2017-05-08
CVE-2017-0895 Nextcloud Server 信息泄露漏洞 — Nextcloud Server 4.3 -2017-05-08
CVE-2017-2686 Siemens RUGGEDCOM ROX I 信息泄露漏洞 — RUGGEDCOM ROX I All versions 6.5 -2017-03-29
CVE-2017-2689 Siemens RUGGEDCOM ROX I 安全漏洞 — RUGGEDCOM ROX I All versions 8.8 -2017-03-29
CVE-2016-9464 Nextcloud Server 安全漏洞 — Nextcloud Server Nextcloud Server before 9.0.54 and 10.0.0 4.3 -2017-03-28
CVE-2014-2349 Emerson DeltaV Use of Improper Authorization — DeltaV 6.0 -2014-05-22

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当) represent 986 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.