CWE-287
DiscouragedImproper Authentication
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
6052 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-866H-762V-8QWW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-09 15:31 – Updated: 2025-11-03 21:34The Amp’ed RF BT-AP 111 Bluetooth access point's HTTP admin interface does not have an authentication feature, allowing unauthorized access to anyone with network access.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-9994"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-09-09T14:15:49Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The Amp\u2019ed RF BT-AP 111 Bluetooth access point\u0027s HTTP admin interface does not have an authentication feature, allowing unauthorized access to anyone with network access.",
"id": "GHSA-866h-762v-8qww",
"modified": "2025-11-03T21:34:26Z",
"published": "2025-09-09T15:31:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-9994"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ampedrftech.com/guides/BT-AP111_UserManual.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/763183"
}
],
"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-868G-RQ8G-XCXG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:02 – Updated: 2022-06-29 00:00IBM Planning Analytics Local 2.0 connects to a Redis server. The Redis server, an in-memory data structure store, running on the remote host is not protected by password authentication. A remote attacker can exploit this to gain unauthorized access to the server. IBM X-Force ID: 186401.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-4670"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-05-17T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "IBM Planning Analytics Local 2.0 connects to a Redis server. The Redis server, an in-memory data structure store, running on the remote host is not protected by password authentication. A remote attacker can exploit this to gain unauthorized access to the server. IBM X-Force ID: 186401.",
"id": "GHSA-868g-rq8g-xcxg",
"modified": "2022-06-29T00:00:33Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:02:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-4670"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/186401"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6436821"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86MM-WWRR-F4H4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-16 00:30 – Updated: 2026-01-16 15:31A vulnerability in the Provisioning Manager component of Mitel MiVoice MX-ONE 7.3 (7.3.0.0.50) through 7.8 SP1 (7.8.1.0.14) could allow an unauthenticated attacker to conduct an authentication bypass attack due to improper authentication mechanisms. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to user or admin accounts in the system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-67822"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-15T22:16:10Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A vulnerability in the Provisioning Manager component of Mitel MiVoice MX-ONE 7.3 (7.3.0.0.50) through 7.8 SP1 (7.8.1.0.14) could allow an unauthenticated attacker to conduct an authentication bypass attack due to improper authentication mechanisms. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to user or admin accounts in the system.",
"id": "GHSA-86mm-wwrr-f4h4",
"modified": "2026-01-16T15:31:24Z",
"published": "2026-01-16T00:30:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-67822"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mitel.com/support/security-advisories"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mitel.com/support/security-advisories/mitel-product-security-advisory-misa-2025-0009"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86PC-G5XQ-RHF4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 03:50 – Updated: 2022-05-02 03:50Arcade Trade Script 1.0 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and gain administrative access by setting the adminLoggedIn cookie to true.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2009-3966"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2009-11-18T23:30:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Arcade Trade Script 1.0 allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and gain administrative access by setting the adminLoggedIn cookie to true.",
"id": "GHSA-86pc-g5xq-rhf4",
"modified": "2022-05-02T03:50:12Z",
"published": "2022-05-02T03:50:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2009-3966"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/36448"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/9482"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-86PW-MMR6-R9MH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-12-10 00:30 – Updated: 2023-12-13 21:30The Goodix Fingerprint Device, as shipped in Dell Inspiron 15 computers, does not follow the Secure Device Connection Protocol (SDCP) when enrolling via Linux, and accepts an unauthenticated configuration packet to select the Windows template database, which allows bypass of Windows Hello authentication by enrolling an attacker's fingerprint.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-50430"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-12-09T22:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Goodix Fingerprint Device, as shipped in Dell Inspiron 15 computers, does not follow the Secure Device Connection Protocol (SDCP) when enrolling via Linux, and accepts an unauthenticated configuration packet to select the Windows template database, which allows bypass of Windows Hello authentication by enrolling an attacker\u0027s fingerprint.",
"id": "GHSA-86pw-mmr6-r9mh",
"modified": "2023-12-13T21:30:27Z",
"published": "2023-12-10T00:30:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-50430"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blackwinghq.com/blog/posts/a-touch-of-pwn-part-i"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86Q8-RG63-HVMR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:13 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:133xLOGIC Infinias eIDC32 2.213 devices with Web 1.107 allow Authentication Bypass via CMD.HTM?CMD= because authentication depends on the client side's interpretation of the MYKEY substring.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-11542"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-04-04T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "3xLOGIC Infinias eIDC32 2.213 devices with Web 1.107 allow Authentication Bypass via CMD.HTM?CMD= because authentication depends on the client side\u0027s interpretation of the \u003cKEY\u003eMYKEY\u003c/KEY\u003e substring.",
"id": "GHSA-86q8-rg63-hvmr",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:13:23Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:13:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-11542"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.criticalstart.com/authentication-bypass-vulnerability-discovered-in-infinias-eidc32-webserver"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-86RF-M4CQ-GHM6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:04 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:04Puppet Enterprise versions prior to 2016.4.5 and 2017.2.1 did not correctly authenticate users before returning labeled RBAC access tokens. This issue has been fixed in Puppet Enterprise 2016.4.5 and 2017.2.1. This only affects users with labeled tokens, which is not the default for tokens.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-2297"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-02-01T22:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Puppet Enterprise versions prior to 2016.4.5 and 2017.2.1 did not correctly authenticate users before returning labeled RBAC access tokens. This issue has been fixed in Puppet Enterprise 2016.4.5 and 2017.2.1. This only affects users with labeled tokens, which is not the default for tokens.",
"id": "GHSA-86rf-m4cq-ghm6",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:04:14Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:04:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-2297"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://puppet.com/security/cve/cve-2017-2297"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86RQ-87V9-7PPC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:05 – Updated: 2023-01-27 18:30After a HelloRetryRequest has been sent, the client may negotiate a lower protocol that TLS 1.3, resulting in an invalid state transition in the TLS State Machine. If the client gets into this state, incoming Application Data records will be ignored. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 72.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-17023"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-01-08T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "After a HelloRetryRequest has been sent, the client may negotiate a lower protocol that TLS 1.3, resulting in an invalid state transition in the TLS State Machine. If the client gets into this state, incoming Application Data records will be ignored. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 72.",
"id": "GHSA-86rq-87v9-7ppc",
"modified": "2023-01-27T18:30:30Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:05:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-17023"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1590001"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4234-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4397-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.debian.org/security/2020/dsa-4726"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2020-01"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86WC-MXWC-62WR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:43 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:43tinc before 1.0.30 has a broken authentication protocol, without even a partial mitigation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-16737"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-10-10T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "tinc before 1.0.30 has a broken authentication protocol, without even a partial mitigation.",
"id": "GHSA-86wc-mxwc-62wr",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:43:21Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:43:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-16737"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.starwindsoftware.com/security/sw-20190227-0001"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://tinc-vpn.org/security"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.tinc-vpn.org/git/browse?p=tinc;a=commit;h=d3297fbd3b8c8c8a4661f5bbf89aca5cacba8b5a"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-86X4-WP9F-WRR9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-06 22:36 – Updated: 2026-02-07 00:33Impact
Antrea's network policy priority assignment system has a uint16 arithmetic overflow bug that causes incorrect OpenFlow priority calculations when handling a large numbers of policies with various priority values. This results in potentially incorrect traffic enforcement.
If a user creates a large number of Antrea NetworkPolicies (ANP or ACNP) with varying priorities, some rules with lower logical priorities (higher numerical priority values) may take precedence over rules with higher logical priorities (lower numerical priority values). Traffic that should be denied by the configured Antrea NetworkPolicies may end up being allowed, potentially letting an attacker access a sensitive service. Traffic that should be allowed by the configured Antrea NetworkPolicies may end up being denied, breaking applications and potentially opening the door for denial-of-service attacks.
The Antrea NetworkPolicy system comes with support for priority Tiers. Rules defined within a Tier cannot take precedence over rules defined in higher priority Tiers. Some users / roles may only be authorized to define within specific Tiers. This security vulnerability enables such users to intentionally "escape" their Tier and override rules in higher priority Tiers.
Antrea deployments that only use upstream Kubernetes NetworkPolicies - and do not use Antrea NetworkPolicies - are not affected.
Patches
https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/pull/7496 Antrea v2.5.0 Antrea v2.4.3 Antrea v2.3.2
Workarounds
Antrea deployments that only use upstream Kubernetes NetworkPolicies - and do not use Antrea NetworkPolicies - are not affected.
For users leveraging Antrea NetworkPolicies, there is no way to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading.
Resources
https://gist.github.com/antoninbas/c429cc3e5bb8479ba7ff38fd6fde59d9 https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/pull/7496 https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/blob/main/docs/antrea-network-policy.md
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "antrea.io/antrea"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.3.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "antrea.io/antrea"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25804"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-287",
"CWE-770"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-06T22:36:29Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-06T23:15:55Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nAntrea\u0027s network policy priority assignment system has a uint16 arithmetic overflow bug that causes incorrect OpenFlow priority calculations when handling a large numbers of policies with various priority values. This results in potentially incorrect traffic enforcement.\n\nIf a user creates a large number of Antrea NetworkPolicies (ANP or ACNP) with varying priorities, some rules with lower logical priorities (higher numerical priority values) may take precedence over rules with higher logical priorities (lower numerical priority values). Traffic that should be denied by the configured Antrea NetworkPolicies may end up being allowed, potentially letting an attacker access a sensitive service. Traffic that should be allowed by the configured Antrea NetworkPolicies may end up being denied, breaking applications and potentially opening the door for denial-of-service attacks.\n\nThe Antrea NetworkPolicy system comes with support for priority Tiers. Rules defined within a Tier cannot take precedence over rules defined in higher priority Tiers. Some users / roles may only be authorized to define within specific Tiers. This security vulnerability enables such users to intentionally \"escape\" their Tier and override rules in higher priority Tiers.\n\nAntrea deployments that *only* use upstream Kubernetes NetworkPolicies - and do not use Antrea NetworkPolicies - are not affected.\n\n### Patches\nhttps://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/pull/7496\nAntrea v2.5.0\nAntrea v2.4.3\nAntrea v2.3.2\n\n### Workarounds\n\nAntrea deployments that *only* use upstream Kubernetes NetworkPolicies - and do not use Antrea NetworkPolicies - are not affected.\n\nFor users leveraging Antrea NetworkPolicies, there is no way to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading.\n\n### Resources\n\nhttps://gist.github.com/antoninbas/c429cc3e5bb8479ba7ff38fd6fde59d9\nhttps://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/pull/7496\nhttps://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/blob/main/docs/antrea-network-policy.md",
"id": "GHSA-86x4-wp9f-wrr9",
"modified": "2026-02-07T00:33:42Z",
"published": "2026-02-06T22:36:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/security/advisories/GHSA-86x4-wp9f-wrr9"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25804"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/pull/7496"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/commit/86c4b6010f3be536866f339b632621c23d7186fa"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/antoninbas/c429cc3e5bb8479ba7ff38fd6fde59d9"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/blob/main/docs/antrea-network-policy.md"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Antrea has invalid enforcement order for network policy rules caused by integer overflow"
}
Mitigation
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
CAPEC-114: Authentication Abuse
An attacker obtains unauthorized access to an application, service or device either through knowledge of the inherent weaknesses of an authentication mechanism, or by exploiting a flaw in the authentication scheme's implementation. In such an attack an authentication mechanism is functioning but a carefully controlled sequence of events causes the mechanism to grant access to the attacker.
CAPEC-115: Authentication Bypass
An attacker gains access to application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by evading or circumventing an authentication mechanism. The attacker is therefore able to access protected data without authentication ever having taken place.
CAPEC-151: Identity Spoofing
Identity Spoofing refers to the action of assuming (i.e., taking on) the identity of some other entity (human or non-human) and then using that identity to accomplish a goal. An adversary may craft messages that appear to come from a different principle or use stolen / spoofed authentication credentials.
CAPEC-194: Fake the Source of Data
An adversary takes advantage of improper authentication to provide data or services under a falsified identity. The purpose of using the falsified identity may be to prevent traceability of the provided data or to assume the rights granted to another individual. One of the simplest forms of this attack would be the creation of an email message with a modified "From" field in order to appear that the message was sent from someone other than the actual sender. The root of the attack (in this case the email system) fails to properly authenticate the source and this results in the reader incorrectly performing the instructed action. Results of the attack vary depending on the details of the attack, but common results include privilege escalation, obfuscation of other attacks, and data corruption/manipulation.
CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client
An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.
CAPEC-593: Session Hijacking
This type of attack involves an adversary that exploits weaknesses in an application's use of sessions in performing authentication. The adversary is able to steal or manipulate an active session and use it to gain unathorized access to the application.
CAPEC-633: Token Impersonation
An adversary exploits a weakness in authentication to create an access token (or equivalent) that impersonates a different entity, and then associates a process/thread to that that impersonated token. This action causes a downstream user to make a decision or take action that is based on the assumed identity, and not the response that blocks the adversary.
CAPEC-650: Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server
By exploiting insufficient permissions, it is possible to upload a web shell to a web server in such a way that it can be executed remotely. This shell can have various capabilities, thereby acting as a "gateway" to the underlying web server. The shell might execute at the higher permission level of the web server, providing the ability the execute malicious code at elevated levels.
CAPEC-94: Adversary in the Middle (AiTM)
An adversary targets the communication between two components (typically client and server), in order to alter or obtain data from transactions. A general approach entails the adversary placing themself within the communication channel between the two components.