CWE-862
Weakness Allowed-with-ReviewMissing Authorization
Abstraction: Class · Status: Incomplete
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Dimensions
- Behavior-Property: Missing
- Behavior-Type: Authorization
Mapping guidance
This CWE entry is a Class and might have Base-level children that would be more appropriate
Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit
Relationships and members
Modes of introduction
OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.
Authorization weaknesses may arise when a single-user application is ported to a multi-user environment.
A developer may introduce authorization weaknesses because of a lack of understanding about the underlying technologies. For example, a developer may assume that attackers cannot modify certain inputs such as headers or cookies.
Detection methods
Automated Static Analysis
Automated static analysis is useful for detecting commonly-used idioms for authorization. A tool may be able to analyze related configuration files, such as .htaccess in Apache web servers, or detect the usage of commonly-used authorization libraries.
Generally, automated static analysis tools have difficulty detecting custom authorization schemes. In addition, the software's design may include some functionality that is accessible to any user and does not require an authorization check; an automated technique that detects the absence of authorization may report false positives.
Effectiveness: Limited
Automated Dynamic Analysis
Automated dynamic analysis may find many or all possible interfaces that do not require authorization, but manual analysis is required to determine if the lack of authorization violates business logic.
Manual Analysis
This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.
Specifically, manual static analysis is useful for evaluating the correctness of custom authorization mechanisms.
Effectiveness: Moderate
These may be more effective than strictly automated techniques. This is especially the case with weaknesses that are related to design and business rules. However, manual efforts might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints.
Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Web Application Scanner
Web Services Scanner
Database Scanners
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Host Application Interface Scanner
Fuzz Tester
Framework-based Fuzzer
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Manual Static Analysis - Source Code
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source
Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Automated Static Analysis - Source Code
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Source code Weakness Analyzer
Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Architecture or Design Review
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Highly cost effective:
Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)
Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction
Effectiveness: High
Notes
Terminology
Assuming a user with a given identity, authorization is the process of determining whether that user can access a given resource, based on the user's privileges and any permissions or other access-control specifications that apply to the resource.
Content history
Suggested mappings to ISA/IEC 62443.
Provided diagram to improve CWE usability
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Observed_Examples, References, Relationships
updated Potential_Mitigations
updated Relationships
updated Detection_Factors
updated Relationships
updated Applicable_Platforms, Modes_of_Introduction, References, Relationships
updated References
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Alternate_Terms, Observed_Examples
updated Observed_Examples, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Observed_Examples
updated Description, Potential_Mitigations
updated References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Common_Consequences, Description, Diagram, Relationships, Terminology_Notes
updated Applicable_Platforms, Detection_Factors, Observed_Examples, References
updated Applicable_Platforms, Relationships, Weakness_Ordinalities
updated Applicable_Platforms, Observed_Examples, Relationships
updated Applicable_Platforms, Dimensions, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
19863 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-87G7-76GR-73G8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-26 03:30 – Updated: 2026-09-26 03:30OpenClaw (npm package openclaw) before 2026.7.1 fails to enforce the owner-only authorization requirement for Claude Code permission prompts delivered through the MCP channel bridge. An authorized non-owner channel sender with channel command access can approve or deny a pending permission request intended for the owner, causing the requested action to proceed without owner consent. The practical impact depends on the pending action and the host capabilities requested by the Claude Code run. The issue is fixed in version 2026.7.1.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-100585"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-26T03:17:06Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "OpenClaw (npm package `openclaw`) before 2026.7.1 fails to enforce the owner-only authorization requirement for Claude Code permission prompts delivered through the MCP channel bridge. An authorized non-owner channel sender with channel command access can approve or deny a pending permission request intended for the owner, causing the requested action to proceed without owner consent. The practical impact depends on the pending action and the host capabilities requested by the Claude Code run. The issue is fixed in version 2026.7.1.",
"id": "GHSA-87g7-76gr-73g8",
"modified": "2026-09-26T03:30:27Z",
"published": "2026-09-26T03:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-p5g8-m35v-7m82"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-100585"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-before-2026.7.1-authentication-bypass-via-mcp-channel"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/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-87P7-4V38-33C9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-19 18:32 – Updated: 2026-10-19 18:32Missing authorization in the Sieve editheader action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Set header value action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to make the server send mail as any address, DKIM-signed where the address is at a domain the server signs for. A Sieve script's editheader (addheader/deleteheader) could add or delete any header field except Received and Return-Path, and the server applies a script's header edits before it queues a redirect, so the redirected copy is sent as the script left it. The server signs a message's first delivery pass as the domain named in its From header wherever it signs DKIM for that domain and the message carries no signature of it. A script could therefore delete and re-add From - another account's address, or anyone's at a hosted domain - and redirect, so the server sent the message in that name and, for a hosted domain, signed it with that domain's DKIM key, a forgery aligned to pass the domain's DMARC; or, where another sender's domain is one the server signs for, delete the DKIM-Signature that sender's message arrived with, alter a field, and redirect, so the server re-signed the altered message as that sender's domain. editheader placed no restriction on From, Sender, Resent-From, Resent-Sender or DKIM-Signature. The editheader action was introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a domain's or an account's rule's Set header value action could likewise set From, Sender, Resent-From, Resent-Sender or DKIM-Signature ahead of a forward or a copy, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have the server forward or copy a message in the name of any address, signed, where that address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, with that domain's key.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-107566"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-19T16:17:01Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing authorization in the Sieve editheader action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Set header value action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to make the server send mail as any address, DKIM-signed where the address is at a domain the server signs for. A Sieve script\u0027s editheader (addheader/deleteheader) could add or delete any header field except Received and Return-Path, and the server applies a script\u0027s header edits before it queues a redirect, so the redirected copy is sent as the script left it. The server signs a message\u0027s first delivery pass as the domain named in its From header wherever it signs DKIM for that domain and the message carries no signature of it. A script could therefore delete and re-add From - another account\u0027s address, or anyone\u0027s at a hosted domain - and redirect, so the server sent the message in that name and, for a hosted domain, signed it with that domain\u0027s DKIM key, a forgery aligned to pass the domain\u0027s DMARC; or, where another sender\u0027s domain is one the server signs for, delete the DKIM-Signature that sender\u0027s message arrived with, alter a field, and redirect, so the server re-signed the altered message as that sender\u0027s domain. editheader placed no restriction on From, Sender, Resent-From, Resent-Sender or DKIM-Signature. The editheader action was introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a domain\u0027s or an account\u0027s rule\u0027s Set header value action could likewise set From, Sender, Resent-From, Resent-Sender or DKIM-Signature ahead of a forward or a copy, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have the server forward or copy a message in the name of any address, signed, where that address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, with that domain\u0027s key.",
"id": "GHSA-87p7-4v38-33c9",
"modified": "2026-10-19T18:32:11Z",
"published": "2026-10-19T18:32:11Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-107566"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/releases/v6.3.7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/hmailserver/hmailserver/-/work_items/83"
}
],
"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-87PR-RMR3-3WR6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-12 06:30 – Updated: 2025-02-25 06:30The aDirectory – WordPress Directory Listing Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized loss of data due to a missing capability check on the adqs_delete_listing() function in all versions up to, and including, 2.3. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to delete arbitrary posts.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-13541"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-12T04:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The aDirectory \u2013 WordPress Directory Listing Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized loss of data due to a missing capability check on the adqs_delete_listing() function in all versions up to, and including, 2.3. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to delete arbitrary posts.",
"id": "GHSA-87pr-rmr3-3wr6",
"modified": "2025-02-25T06:30:49Z",
"published": "2025-02-12T06:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-13541"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/adirectory/tags/1.3.4/inc/Frontend/Ajax.php#L115"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/adirectory/tags/1.9.5/inc/Frontend/Ajax.php#L115"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/adirectory/tags/2.1/inc/Frontend/Ajax.php#L113"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026old=3235167%40adirectory\u0026new=3235167%40adirectory\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/c99b8a94-c35b-43a1-bb14-2ca97be421cc?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-87Q9-4HVH-MJRM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-14 21:30 – Updated: 2025-10-14 21:30NVIDIA Jetson Linux contains a vulnerability in UEFI, where improper authentication may allow a privileged user to cause corruption of the Linux Device Tree. A successful exploitation of this vulnerability might lead to data tampering, denial of service.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-33182"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-14T19:15:40Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "NVIDIA Jetson Linux contains a vulnerability in UEFI, where improper authentication may allow a privileged user to cause corruption of the Linux Device Tree. A successful exploitation of this vulnerability might lead to data tampering, denial of service.",
"id": "GHSA-87q9-4hvh-mjrm",
"modified": "2025-10-14T21:30:45Z",
"published": "2025-10-14T21:30:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-33182"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5716"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-87RH-WC85-XQVC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-26 21:30 – Updated: 2023-02-03 20:40A missing permission check in Jenkins Orka by MacStadium Plugin 1.31 and earlier allows attackers with Overall/Read permission to enumerate credentials IDs of credentials stored in Jenkins.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "io.jenkins.plugins:macstadium-orka"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.32"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-24431"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-01-27T01:27:22Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-26T21:18:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A missing permission check in Jenkins Orka by MacStadium Plugin 1.31 and earlier allows attackers with Overall/Read permission to enumerate credentials IDs of credentials stored in Jenkins.",
"id": "GHSA-87rh-wc85-xqvc",
"modified": "2023-02-03T20:40:22Z",
"published": "2023-01-26T21:30:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-24431"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2023-01-24/#SECURITY-2772%20(1)"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "Missing permission checks in Jenkins Orka Plugin allow enumerating credentials IDs "
}
GHSA-87V4-C5H4-88XG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-21 18:32 – Updated: 2025-05-12 15:30Incorrect access control in laskBlog v2.6.1 allows attackers to arbitrarily delete user accounts via a crafted request.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-28103"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-21T18:15:22Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Incorrect access control in laskBlog v2.6.1 allows attackers to arbitrarily delete user accounts via a crafted request.",
"id": "GHSA-87v4-c5h4-88xg",
"modified": "2025-05-12T15:30:40Z",
"published": "2025-04-21T18:32:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-28103"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DogukanUrker/flaskBlog/issues/130"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/coleak2021/77895b7a7b335ae17eb57390f4a94917"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-87V8-76RG-M5W6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-29 18:31 – Updated: 2026-08-29 18:31iFlytek astron-agent through 1.1.1 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the copyFlow endpoint that fails to validate workflow ownership. Authenticated attackers can enumerate workflow identifiers and overwrite other tenants' workflows or copy private workflows to read their definitions.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-82475"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-29T17:18:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "iFlytek astron-agent through 1.1.1 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the copyFlow endpoint that fails to validate workflow ownership. Authenticated attackers can enumerate workflow identifiers and overwrite other tenants\u0027 workflows or copy private workflows to read their definitions.",
"id": "GHSA-87v8-76rg-m5w6",
"modified": "2026-08-29T18:31:32Z",
"published": "2026-08-29T18:31:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-82475"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/iflytek/astron-agent/issues/1590"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/iflytek/astron-agent"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/iflytek/astron-agent/blob/v1.1.1/console/backend/toolkit/src/main/java/com/iflytek/astron/console/toolkit/service/workflow/WorkflowService.java"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/iflytek-astron-agent-through-1.1.1-workflow-hijacking-via-missing-ownership-check"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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"
}
]
}
GHSA-87W4-XWRV-8VJ5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-04-20 00:00 – Updated: 2022-04-28 00:00The Elementor Website Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized execution of several AJAX actions due to a missing capability check in the ~/core/app/modules/onboarding/module.php file that make it possible for attackers to modify site data in addition to uploading malicious files that can be used to obtain remote code execution, in versions 3.6.0 to 3.6.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-1329"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-434",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-04-19T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Elementor Website Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized execution of several AJAX actions due to a missing capability check in the ~/core/app/modules/onboarding/module.php file that make it possible for attackers to modify site data in addition to uploading malicious files that can be used to obtain remote code execution, in versions 3.6.0 to 3.6.2.",
"id": "GHSA-87w4-xwrv-8vj5",
"modified": "2022-04-28T00:00:39Z",
"published": "2022-04-20T00:00:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-1329"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/2708766/elementor/trunk/core/app/modules/onboarding/module.php"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.pluginvulnerabilities.com/2022/04/12/5-million-install-wordpress-plugin-elementor-contains-authenticated-remote-code-execution-rce-vulnerability"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2022/04/elementor-critical-remote-code-execution-vulnerability"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/168615/WordPress-Elementor-3.6.2-Shell-Upload.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-87WM-CFP5-465J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-19 03:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 08:46The Ad Inserter for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure in versions up to, and including, 2.7.30 via the ai_ajax function. This can allow unauthenticated attackers to extract sensitive data such as post titles and slugs (including those of protected posts along with their passwords), usernames, available roles, the plugin license key provided the remote debugging option is enabled. In the default state it is disabled.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-4645"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-10-19T02:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Ad Inserter for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure in versions up to, and including, 2.7.30 via the ai_ajax function. This can allow unauthenticated attackers to extract sensitive data such as post titles and slugs (including those of protected posts along with their passwords), usernames, available roles, the plugin license key provided the remote debugging option is enabled. In the default state it is disabled.",
"id": "GHSA-87wm-cfp5-465j",
"modified": "2024-04-04T08:46:55Z",
"published": "2023-10-19T03:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-4645"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/ad-inserter/trunk/ad-inserter.php#L6529"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026new=2969942%40ad-inserter%2Ftags%2F2.7.31\u0026old=2922718%40ad-inserter%2Ftrunk"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/57b3eef3-e165-45ac-89d7-2a2a6529b310?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-87X2-8PVV-68M2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-28 00:30 – Updated: 2026-10-28 15:31Use after free in Paint in Google Chrome prior to 156.0.8078.73 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-118353"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-416",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-27T23:17:04Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Use after free in Paint in Google Chrome prior to 156.0.8078.73 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)",
"id": "GHSA-87x2-8pvv-68m2",
"modified": "2026-10-28T15:31:37Z",
"published": "2026-10-28T00:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-118353"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/10/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0562499947.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/572312175"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"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) [REF-229] 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 access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied 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 [REF-7].
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-665: Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws
An adversary leverages a firmware weakness within the Thunderbolt protocol, on a computing device to manipulate Thunderbolt controller firmware in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the implementation of authorization and verification schemes within Thunderbolt protection mechanisms. Upon gaining physical access to a target device, the adversary conducts high-level firmware manipulation of the victim Thunderbolt controller SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) flash, through the use of a SPI Programing device and an external Thunderbolt device, typically as the target device is booting up. If successful, this allows the adversary to modify memory, subvert authentication mechanisms, spoof identities and content, and extract data and memory from the target device. Currently 7 major vulnerabilities exist within Thunderbolt protocol with 9 attack vectors as noted in the Execution Flow.