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
19891 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-9J9C-H6WF-5647
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-03 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:34Missing Authorization vulnerability in Matat Technologies TextMe SMS allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects TextMe SMS: from n/a through 1.9.1.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-31789"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-03T14:15:39Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Matat Technologies TextMe SMS allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects TextMe SMS: from n/a through 1.9.1.",
"id": "GHSA-9j9c-h6wf-5647",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:34:28Z",
"published": "2025-04-03T15:31:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-31789"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/textme-sms-integration/vulnerability/wordpress-textme-sms-plugin-1-9-1-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"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-9J9H-M3WQ-X944
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-02 12:30 – Updated: 2026-07-02 12:30Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in Woostify Sites Library <= 1.6.2 versions.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-66076"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-02T12:16:52Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in Woostify Sites Library \u003c= 1.6.2 versions.",
"id": "GHSA-9j9h-m3wq-x944",
"modified": "2026-07-02T12:30:59Z",
"published": "2026-07-02T12:30:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-66076"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/woostify-sites-library/vulnerability/wordpress-woostify-sites-library-plugin-1-6-2-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JCH-CWM3-WFJH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-17 18:35 – Updated: 2026-06-17 18:35Missing Authorization vulnerability in Rara Themes Metro Magazine allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.
This issue affects Metro Magazine: from n/a through 1.3.7.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-37496"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-17T13:19:12Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Rara Themes Metro Magazine allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.\n\nThis issue affects Metro Magazine: from n/a through 1.3.7.",
"id": "GHSA-9jch-cwm3-wfjh",
"modified": "2026-06-17T18:35:42Z",
"published": "2026-06-17T18:35:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-37496"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/theme/metro-magazine/vulnerability/wordpress-metro-magazine-theme-1-3-7-broken-access-control-on-notice-dismissal-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JCW-CW9Q-R69R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-14 03:31 – Updated: 2026-04-14 03:31Due to a missing authorization check in SAP ERP and SAP S/4HANA (Private Cloud and On-Premise), an authenticated attacker could execute a particular ABAP report to overwrite any existing eight?character executable ABAP report without authorization. If the overwritten report is subsequently executed, the intended functionality could become unavailable. Successful exploitation impacts availability, with a limited impact on integrity confined to the affected report, while confidentiality remains unaffected.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-34256"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-14T01:16:03Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Due to a missing authorization check in SAP ERP and SAP S/4HANA (Private Cloud and On-Premise), an authenticated attacker could execute a particular ABAP report to overwrite any existing eight?character executable ABAP report without authorization. If the overwritten report is subsequently executed, the intended functionality could become unavailable. Successful exploitation impacts availability, with a limited impact on integrity confined to the affected report, while confidentiality remains unaffected.",
"id": "GHSA-9jcw-cw9q-r69r",
"modified": "2026-04-14T03:31:40Z",
"published": "2026-04-14T03:31:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-34256"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://me.sap.com/notes/3731908"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://url.sap/sapsecuritypatchday"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JCW-GP33-G7J3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-01 15:31 – Updated: 2024-11-01 15:31Missing Authorization vulnerability in ProfileGrid User Profiles ProfileGrid allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects ProfileGrid: from n/a through 5.8.7.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-37453"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-01T15:15:25Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in ProfileGrid User Profiles ProfileGrid allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects ProfileGrid: from n/a through 5.8.7.",
"id": "GHSA-9jcw-gp33-g7j3",
"modified": "2024-11-01T15:31:57Z",
"published": "2024-11-01T15:31:57Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-37453"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/profilegrid-user-profiles-groups-and-communities/wordpress-profilegrid-user-profiles-groups-and-communities-plugin-5-8-7-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=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-9JH8-CC8H-44V2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-03-01 00:00 – Updated: 2022-03-17 00:04The Customize WordPress Emails and Alerts WordPress plugin before 1.8.7 does not have authorisation and CSRF check in its bnfw_search_users AJAX action, allowing any authenticated users to call it and query for user e-mail prefixes (finding the first letter, then the second one, then the third one etc.).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-0345"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-352",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-02-28T09:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Customize WordPress Emails and Alerts WordPress plugin before 1.8.7 does not have authorisation and CSRF check in its bnfw_search_users AJAX action, allowing any authenticated users to call it and query for user e-mail prefixes (finding the first letter, then the second one, then the third one etc.).",
"id": "GHSA-9jh8-cc8h-44v2",
"modified": "2022-03-17T00:04:55Z",
"published": "2022-03-01T00:00:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-0345"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/b3b523b9-6c92-4091-837a-d34e3174eb19"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JJC-FW8X-FMWX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-18 17:58 – Updated: 2026-09-18 17:58Summary
Moquette MQTT Broker fails to enforce ACL write permission checks when publishing Will (Last Will and Testament) messages on behalf of disconnected clients. All normal PUBLISH paths (receivedPublishQos0, receivedPublishQos1, receivedPublishQos2) correctly invoke authorizator.canWrite() before publishing, but the Will message publishing path (fireWill() → publishWill() → publish2Subscribers()) completely bypasses this authorization check.
This allows an unauthenticated attacker (when allow_anonymous=true, which is the default) to inject arbitrary messages into any ACL-protected topic by setting a restricted topic as the Will Topic in the CONNECT packet and then disconnecting abruptly via TCP RST.
Other major MQTT Broker implementations (Mosquitto, EMQX, HiveMQ) correctly enforce ACL checks on Will messages, confirming this is a bug, not a design choice.
Details
In the MQTT protocol, a client can declare a "Will" topic and message in the CONNECT packet. When the client disconnects abnormally (without sending a DISCONNECT packet), the Broker publishes the Will message on behalf of the client. Although the Will message content (topic and payload) is entirely controlled by the connecting client — making it functionally equivalent to a PUBLISH — Moquette skips the ACL check for this path.
Root Cause
File: broker/src/main/java/io/moquette/broker/PostOffice.java (v0.18.0)
Will publishing path (lines 286-328) — no canWrite() check:
public void fireWill(Session bindedSession) {
final ISessionsRepository.Will will = bindedSession.getWill();
if (will.delayInterval == 0) {
publishWill(will); // No canWrite() check!
} else {
trackWillSpecificationForFutureFire(...);
}
}
private void publishWill(ISessionsRepository.Will will) {
// ... build message ...
publish2Subscribers(WILL_PUBLISKER, messageExpiryInstant, willPublishMessage);
// No canWrite() check!
}
Normal PUBLISH path (line 641) — has canWrite() check:
if (!authorizator.canWrite(topic, username, clientID)) {
LOG.error("client is not authorized to publish on topic: {}", topic);
return;
}
Additionally, SessionRegistry.createNewWill() (line 408-428) stores the Will topic from the CONNECT packet without any canWrite() pre-check. The fireWill()/publishWill() method is the only publishing path that does not invoke authorizator.canWrite(), creating a complete authorization bypass.
Prerequisites
| Condition | Who controls | Default? | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attacker can establish MQTT connection to Broker | Environment | Yes | allow_anonymous defaults to true |
| Broker has ACL restricting topic write access | Application | No | Only deployments with ACL configured have "bypass" significance, but this is a normal security deployment |
| Client disconnects abnormally (TCP RST, not DISCONNECT) | Attacker | Yes | Attacker simply closes the TCP connection |
PoC
Verified against Moquette Broker v0.18.0 (latest release as of 2024-12-27). All scripts are included in the attached GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip.
GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip
Environment Setup
Step 1: Download Moquette Broker v0.18.0
Download the official release bundle from GitHub and extract:
curl -L -o /tmp/moquette-0.18-bundle.tar.gz "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/releases/download/v0.18.0/distribution-0.18-bundle.tar.gz"
mkdir -p /tmp/moquette-0.18
tar xzf /tmp/moquette-0.18-bundle.tar.gz -C /tmp/moquette-0.18
Step 2: Configure ACL rules
Replace /tmp/moquette-0.18/config/acl.conf with the provided acl.conf (from POC zip), which contains:
# acl.conf - restrict write access to restricted/topic
topic write allowed/topic
topic read restricted/topic
Note: Must use
topicrules (notpatternrules). Moquette'sAuthorizationsCollector.canDoOperation()skipspatternrules when username is null (anonymous users), becauseisNotEmpty(null)returns false.
Edit /tmp/moquette-0.18/config/moquette.conf to ensure ACL is enabled. Use the provided moquette.conf (from POC zip) as reference:
# moquette.conf
port 1883
host 0.0.0.0
allow_anonymous true
acl_file config/acl.conf
Step 3: Download dependency and compile POC scripts
Download commons-collections-3.2.1.jar (required by CC6 deserialization chain) and compile the POC Java sources (all from POC zip):
# Download commons-collections (required for CC6 RCE POC only)
# Place commons-collections-3.2.1.jar in /tmp/
# Compile POC scripts
cd /tmp
javac -cp /tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar CC6PayloadGen.java # CC6 deserialization payload generator
javac -cp /tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar AttackerCC6_v018.java # Attacker-side full POC (Will bypass + CC6 RCE)
javac MqttDeviceService_v018.java # Victim-side IoT subscriber service
Scripts overview:
| Script | Language | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
poc_will_bypass.py |
Python | Lightweight Will ACL bypass verification (no Java/deserialization dependency) |
AttackerCC6_v018.java |
Java | Full attacker POC: generates CC6 payload, verifies ACL blocks direct PUBLISH, bypasses ACL via Will, verifies victim-side RCE |
CC6PayloadGen.java |
Java | CC6 deserialization payload generator (dependency of AttackerCC6_v018) |
MqttDeviceService_v018.java |
Java | Victim-side IoT device subscriber — subscribes to restricted/topic, deserializes received messages via ObjectInputStream.readObject() |
MoquetteWillAclBypassPoc.java |
Java | Standalone pure-Java POC for v0.15 (no external dependencies, verifies Will ACL bypass only) |
acl.conf |
Config | ACL rules — restricted/topic read-only, no write |
moquette.conf |
Config | Broker configuration — enables ACL, allows anonymous |
Reproduction — Will ACL Bypass Only (Python, no dependencies)
This verifies the core vulnerability: Will message bypasses ACL. Uses poc_will_bypass.py.
Terminal 1 — Start the Broker (using Moquette's built-in main class io.moquette.broker.Server):
cd /tmp/moquette-0.18 && java -cp 'lib/*:lib' io.moquette.broker.Server
Wait for "Server started" log.
Terminal 2 — Run POC:
python3 poc_will_bypass.py
This script automatically performs:
1. Subscriber connects and subscribes to restricted/topic
2. Verifies direct PUBLISH to restricted/topic is blocked by ACL
3. Attacker connects with Will Topic=restricted/topic, then RST-disconnects
4. Checks if subscriber received the Will message on the restricted topic
Expected output:
[Step 1] Direct PUBLISH to restricted/topic (should be blocked)
[+] No message - ACL blocking direct PUBLISH (expected)
[Step 2] Will ACL Bypass on v0.18.0
SUBACK: 9003000100
Attacker connected, Will set to 'restricted/topic'
RST disconnecting attacker...
[!!!] WILL MESSAGE RECEIVED on restricted/topic!
[!!!] VULNERABILITY CONFIRMED on Moquette v0.18.0!
Reproduction — Full RCE Chain (Will Bypass + CC6 Deserialization)
This demonstrates the real-world impact: Will bypass + Java deserialization = Remote Code Execution. Uses AttackerCC6_v018.java, CC6PayloadGen.java, and MqttDeviceService_v018.java.
Terminal 1 — Start the Broker (using Moquette's built-in main class io.moquette.broker.Server):
cd /tmp/moquette-0.18 && java -cp 'lib/*:lib' io.moquette.broker.Server
Wait for "Server started" log.
Terminal 2 — Start victim subscriber (MqttDeviceService_v018.java):
cd /tmp && java -cp .:/tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar MqttDeviceService_v018 localhost 1883
This simulates an IoT device that subscribes to restricted/topic and deserializes received messages via ObjectInputStream.readObject(). Wait for:
[等待中] 等待管理平台下发指令...
Terminal 3 — Run attacker POC (AttackerCC6_v018.java):
cd /tmp && java -cp .:/tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar AttackerCC6_v018 localhost 1883
This script automatically performs:
1. Generate CC6 payload — uses CC6PayloadGen.java to create a Commons Collections CC6 deserialization chain that executes touch /tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_<timestamp>
2. Verify direct PUBLISH is blocked — attempts PUBLISH to restricted/topic, confirms ACL blocks it
3. Bypass ACL via Will — CONNECT with Will Topic=restricted/topic, Will Message=CC6 serialized payload, then RST disconnect
4. Verify victim-side RCE — checks if /tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_<timestamp> file was created on the victim
Key verification point: Java CC6 chain triggers
execonce duringHashMap.put()when constructing the payload (a known CC6 artifact). The POC deletes this file before the Will bypass step, then verifies the file is re-created by the victim'sreadObject(), confirming the RCE is on the victim side, not a POC construction side-effect.
Expected attacker output (Terminal 3):
=== 攻击者 (CC6原生反序列化链) - Moquette v0.18.0 ===
[1] 生成CC6反序列化payload...
payload长度: 1189 字节
[2] 直接PUBLISH到restricted topic (应被ACL拦截)...
已发送
[3] 通过Will消息绕过ACL...
已连接,Will Topic=restricted/topic
Will Payload=CC6序列化数据(1189字节)
RST断开连接...
已断开,Will消息绕过ACL投递成功
[4] 验证受害者端RCE:
-rw-r--r-- 1 fire fire 0 ... /tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_XXXXXXXXXXXXX
*** RCE成功! Will消息绕过ACL投递CC6 payload,受害者readObject()触发命令执行! ***
Expected victim output (Terminal 2):
[收到消息] MQTT消息到达,长度=1189字节
[反序列化] 正在执行 ObjectInputStream.readObject() ...
[反序列化] 完成,对象类型: java.util.HashMap
Impact
- Authorization Bypass: Attacker can inject arbitrary messages into any ACL-restricted topic, completely undermining the Broker's access control
- Remote Code Execution: When subscribers deserialize MQTT message payloads (e.g., using Java
ObjectInputStream.readObject()), attacker can inject deserialization gadgets (e.g., Commons Collections CC6 chain) to achieve RCE - Affected scope: All IoT/messaging middleware scenarios using Moquette as MQTT Broker with ACL enabled
| Metric | Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Attack Vector | Network | MQTT Broker listens on TCP port, network-reachable |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Standard MQTT CONNECT + TCP RST, no special conditions needed |
| Privileges Required | None | allow_anonymous defaults to true |
| User Interaction | None | Fully automated attack |
| Scope | Unchanged | Impact limited to Broker's security domain |
| Confidentiality | None | No data disclosure |
| Integrity | High | ACL write protection completely bypassed |
| Availability | None | No service disruption |
| GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip |
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "io.moquette:moquette-broker"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.18.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-85058"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-09-18T17:58:39Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nMoquette MQTT Broker fails to enforce ACL write permission checks when publishing Will (Last Will and Testament) messages on behalf of disconnected clients. All normal PUBLISH paths (`receivedPublishQos0`, `receivedPublishQos1`, `receivedPublishQos2`) correctly invoke `authorizator.canWrite()` before publishing, but the Will message publishing path (`fireWill()` \u2192 `publishWill()` \u2192 `publish2Subscribers()`) completely bypasses this authorization check.\n\nThis allows an unauthenticated attacker (when `allow_anonymous=true`, which is the default) to inject arbitrary messages into any ACL-protected topic by setting a restricted topic as the Will Topic in the CONNECT packet and then disconnecting abruptly via TCP RST.\n\nOther major MQTT Broker implementations (Mosquitto, EMQX, HiveMQ) correctly enforce ACL checks on Will messages, confirming this is a bug, not a design choice.\n\n## Details\n\nIn the MQTT protocol, a client can declare a \"Will\" topic and message in the CONNECT packet. When the client disconnects abnormally (without sending a DISCONNECT packet), the Broker publishes the Will message on behalf of the client. Although the Will message content (topic and payload) is entirely controlled by the connecting client \u2014 making it functionally equivalent to a PUBLISH \u2014 Moquette skips the ACL check for this path.\n\n### Root Cause\n\n**File**: `broker/src/main/java/io/moquette/broker/PostOffice.java` (v0.18.0)\n\nWill publishing path (lines 286-328) \u2014 **no canWrite() check**:\n```java\npublic void fireWill(Session bindedSession) {\n final ISessionsRepository.Will will = bindedSession.getWill();\n if (will.delayInterval == 0) {\n publishWill(will); // No canWrite() check!\n } else {\n trackWillSpecificationForFutureFire(...);\n }\n}\n\nprivate void publishWill(ISessionsRepository.Will will) {\n // ... build message ...\n publish2Subscribers(WILL_PUBLISKER, messageExpiryInstant, willPublishMessage);\n // No canWrite() check!\n}\n```\n\nNormal PUBLISH path (line 641) \u2014 **has canWrite() check**:\n```java\nif (!authorizator.canWrite(topic, username, clientID)) {\n LOG.error(\"client is not authorized to publish on topic: {}\", topic);\n return;\n}\n```\n\nAdditionally, `SessionRegistry.createNewWill()` (line 408-428) stores the Will topic from the CONNECT packet without any `canWrite()` pre-check. The `fireWill()`/`publishWill()` method is the only publishing path that does not invoke `authorizator.canWrite()`, creating a complete authorization bypass.\n\n### Prerequisites\n\n| Condition | Who controls | Default? | Notes |\n|-----------|-------------|----------|-------|\n| Attacker can establish MQTT connection to Broker | Environment | Yes | `allow_anonymous` defaults to true |\n| Broker has ACL restricting topic write access | Application | No | Only deployments with ACL configured have \"bypass\" significance, but this is a normal security deployment |\n| Client disconnects abnormally (TCP RST, not DISCONNECT) | Attacker | Yes | Attacker simply closes the TCP connection |\n\n## PoC\n\nVerified against Moquette Broker **v0.18.0** (latest release as of 2024-12-27). All scripts are included in the attached `GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip`.\n[GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/29499548/GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip)\n### Environment Setup\n\n**Step 1: Download Moquette Broker v0.18.0**\n\nDownload the official release bundle from GitHub and extract:\n\n```bash\ncurl -L -o /tmp/moquette-0.18-bundle.tar.gz \"https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/releases/download/v0.18.0/distribution-0.18-bundle.tar.gz\"\nmkdir -p /tmp/moquette-0.18\ntar xzf /tmp/moquette-0.18-bundle.tar.gz -C /tmp/moquette-0.18\n```\n\n**Step 2: Configure ACL rules**\n\nReplace `/tmp/moquette-0.18/config/acl.conf` with the provided `acl.conf` (from POC zip), which contains:\n\n```conf\n# acl.conf - restrict write access to restricted/topic\ntopic write allowed/topic\ntopic read restricted/topic\n```\n\n\u003e Note: Must use `topic` rules (not `pattern` rules). Moquette\u0027s `AuthorizationsCollector.canDoOperation()` skips `pattern` rules when username is null (anonymous users), because `isNotEmpty(null)` returns false.\n\nEdit `/tmp/moquette-0.18/config/moquette.conf` to ensure ACL is enabled. Use the provided `moquette.conf` (from POC zip) as reference:\n\n```conf\n# moquette.conf\nport 1883\nhost 0.0.0.0\nallow_anonymous true\nacl_file config/acl.conf\n```\n\n**Step 3: Download dependency and compile POC scripts**\n\nDownload `commons-collections-3.2.1.jar` (required by CC6 deserialization chain) and compile the POC Java sources (all from POC zip):\n\n```bash\n# Download commons-collections (required for CC6 RCE POC only)\n# Place commons-collections-3.2.1.jar in /tmp/\n\n# Compile POC scripts\ncd /tmp\njavac -cp /tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar CC6PayloadGen.java # CC6 deserialization payload generator\njavac -cp /tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar AttackerCC6_v018.java # Attacker-side full POC (Will bypass + CC6 RCE)\njavac MqttDeviceService_v018.java # Victim-side IoT subscriber service\n```\n\nScripts overview:\n\n| Script | Language | Purpose |\n|--------|----------|---------|\n| `poc_will_bypass.py` | Python | Lightweight Will ACL bypass verification (no Java/deserialization dependency) |\n| `AttackerCC6_v018.java` | Java | Full attacker POC: generates CC6 payload, verifies ACL blocks direct PUBLISH, bypasses ACL via Will, verifies victim-side RCE |\n| `CC6PayloadGen.java` | Java | CC6 deserialization payload generator (dependency of AttackerCC6_v018) |\n| `MqttDeviceService_v018.java` | Java | Victim-side IoT device subscriber \u2014 subscribes to `restricted/topic`, deserializes received messages via `ObjectInputStream.readObject()` |\n| `MoquetteWillAclBypassPoc.java` | Java | Standalone pure-Java POC for v0.15 (no external dependencies, verifies Will ACL bypass only) |\n| `acl.conf` | Config | ACL rules \u2014 `restricted/topic` read-only, no write |\n| `moquette.conf` | Config | Broker configuration \u2014 enables ACL, allows anonymous |\n\n### Reproduction \u2014 Will ACL Bypass Only (Python, no dependencies)\n\nThis verifies the core vulnerability: Will message bypasses ACL. Uses `poc_will_bypass.py`.\n\n**Terminal 1 \u2014 Start the Broker** (using Moquette\u0027s built-in main class `io.moquette.broker.Server`):\n\n```bash\ncd /tmp/moquette-0.18 \u0026\u0026 java -cp \u0027lib/*:lib\u0027 io.moquette.broker.Server\n```\n\nWait for \"Server started\" log.\n\n**Terminal 2 \u2014 Run POC**:\n\n```bash\npython3 poc_will_bypass.py\n```\n\nThis script automatically performs:\n1. Subscriber connects and subscribes to `restricted/topic`\n2. Verifies direct PUBLISH to `restricted/topic` is blocked by ACL\n3. Attacker connects with Will Topic=`restricted/topic`, then RST-disconnects\n4. Checks if subscriber received the Will message on the restricted topic\n\n**Expected output**:\n```\n[Step 1] Direct PUBLISH to restricted/topic (should be blocked)\n [+] No message - ACL blocking direct PUBLISH (expected)\n\n[Step 2] Will ACL Bypass on v0.18.0\n SUBACK: 9003000100\n Attacker connected, Will set to \u0027restricted/topic\u0027\n RST disconnecting attacker...\n [!!!] WILL MESSAGE RECEIVED on restricted/topic!\n [!!!] VULNERABILITY CONFIRMED on Moquette v0.18.0!\n```\n\n### Reproduction \u2014 Full RCE Chain (Will Bypass + CC6 Deserialization)\n\nThis demonstrates the real-world impact: Will bypass + Java deserialization = Remote Code Execution. Uses `AttackerCC6_v018.java`, `CC6PayloadGen.java`, and `MqttDeviceService_v018.java`.\n\n**Terminal 1 \u2014 Start the Broker** (using Moquette\u0027s built-in main class `io.moquette.broker.Server`):\n\n```bash\ncd /tmp/moquette-0.18 \u0026\u0026 java -cp \u0027lib/*:lib\u0027 io.moquette.broker.Server\n```\n\nWait for \"Server started\" log.\n\n**Terminal 2 \u2014 Start victim subscriber** (`MqttDeviceService_v018.java`):\n\n```bash\ncd /tmp \u0026\u0026 java -cp .:/tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar MqttDeviceService_v018 localhost 1883\n```\n\nThis simulates an IoT device that subscribes to `restricted/topic` and deserializes received messages via `ObjectInputStream.readObject()`. Wait for:\n\n```\n[\u7b49\u5f85\u4e2d] \u7b49\u5f85\u7ba1\u7406\u5e73\u53f0\u4e0b\u53d1\u6307\u4ee4...\n```\n\n**Terminal 3 \u2014 Run attacker POC** (`AttackerCC6_v018.java`):\n\n```bash\ncd /tmp \u0026\u0026 java -cp .:/tmp/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar AttackerCC6_v018 localhost 1883\n```\n\nThis script automatically performs:\n1. **Generate CC6 payload** \u2014 uses `CC6PayloadGen.java` to create a Commons Collections CC6 deserialization chain that executes `touch /tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_\u003ctimestamp\u003e`\n2. **Verify direct PUBLISH is blocked** \u2014 attempts PUBLISH to `restricted/topic`, confirms ACL blocks it\n3. **Bypass ACL via Will** \u2014 CONNECT with Will Topic=`restricted/topic`, Will Message=CC6 serialized payload, then RST disconnect\n4. **Verify victim-side RCE** \u2014 checks if `/tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_\u003ctimestamp\u003e` file was created on the victim\n\n\u003e Key verification point: Java CC6 chain triggers `exec` once during `HashMap.put()` when constructing the payload (a known CC6 artifact). The POC deletes this file before the Will bypass step, then verifies the file is re-created by the victim\u0027s `readObject()`, confirming the RCE is on the victim side, not a POC construction side-effect.\n\n**Expected attacker output** (Terminal 3):\n```\n=== \u653b\u51fb\u8005 (CC6\u539f\u751f\u53cd\u5e8f\u5217\u5316\u94fe) - Moquette v0.18.0 ===\n[1] \u751f\u6210CC6\u53cd\u5e8f\u5217\u5316payload...\n payload\u957f\u5ea6: 1189 \u5b57\u8282\n[2] \u76f4\u63a5PUBLISH\u5230restricted topic (\u5e94\u88abACL\u62e6\u622a)...\n \u5df2\u53d1\u9001\n[3] \u901a\u8fc7Will\u6d88\u606f\u7ed5\u8fc7ACL...\n \u5df2\u8fde\u63a5\uff0cWill Topic=restricted/topic\n Will Payload=CC6\u5e8f\u5217\u5316\u6570\u636e(1189\u5b57\u8282)\n RST\u65ad\u5f00\u8fde\u63a5...\n \u5df2\u65ad\u5f00\uff0cWill\u6d88\u606f\u7ed5\u8fc7ACL\u6295\u9012\u6210\u529f\n[4] \u9a8c\u8bc1\u53d7\u5bb3\u8005\u7aefRCE:\n -rw-r--r-- 1 fire fire 0 ... /tmp/pwned_by_will_bypass_XXXXXXXXXXXXX\n *** RCE\u6210\u529f! Will\u6d88\u606f\u7ed5\u8fc7ACL\u6295\u9012CC6 payload\uff0c\u53d7\u5bb3\u8005readObject()\u89e6\u53d1\u547d\u4ee4\u6267\u884c! ***\n```\n\n**Expected victim output** (Terminal 2):\n```\n[\u6536\u5230\u6d88\u606f] MQTT\u6d88\u606f\u5230\u8fbe\uff0c\u957f\u5ea6=1189\u5b57\u8282\n[\u53cd\u5e8f\u5217\u5316] \u6b63\u5728\u6267\u884c ObjectInputStream.readObject() ...\n[\u53cd\u5e8f\u5217\u5316] \u5b8c\u6210\uff0c\u5bf9\u8c61\u7c7b\u578b: java.util.HashMap\n```\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Authorization Bypass**: Attacker can inject arbitrary messages into any ACL-restricted topic, completely undermining the Broker\u0027s access control\n- **Remote Code Execution**: When subscribers deserialize MQTT message payloads (e.g., using Java `ObjectInputStream.readObject()`), attacker can inject deserialization gadgets (e.g., Commons Collections CC6 chain) to achieve RCE\n- **Affected scope**: All IoT/messaging middleware scenarios using Moquette as MQTT Broker with ACL enabled\n\n| Metric | Value | Rationale |\n|--------|-------|-----------|\n| Attack Vector | Network | MQTT Broker listens on TCP port, network-reachable |\n| Attack Complexity | Low | Standard MQTT CONNECT + TCP RST, no special conditions needed |\n| Privileges Required | None | `allow_anonymous` defaults to true |\n| User Interaction | None | Fully automated attack |\n| Scope | Unchanged | Impact limited to Broker\u0027s security domain |\n| Confidentiality | None | No data disclosure |\n| Integrity | High | ACL write protection completely bypassed |\n| Availability | None | No service disruption |\n[GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/29499548/GitHub_Advisory_POC.zip)",
"id": "GHSA-9jjc-fw8x-fmwx",
"modified": "2026-09-18T17:58:39Z",
"published": "2026-09-18T17:58:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/security/advisories/GHSA-9jjc-fw8x-fmwx"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/commit/e23df019f6a11e22c7d2047d4f86d07095466c97"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/commit/f5a323fe782d1505c0097498cb22eb6ec6c96973"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/moquette-io/moquette/releases/tag/v0.18.1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "io.moquette:moquette-broker has a Missing Authorization issue"
}
GHSA-9JM2-WW3F-6GG3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-15 15:30 – Updated: 2025-12-15 15:30The OneSignal – Web Push Notifications plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the settings handling functionality in all versions up to, and including, 3.6.1. This is due to the plugin processing POST requests without verifying user capabilities or nonces. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to overwrite the OneSignal App ID, REST API key, and notification behavior via direct POST requests.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-13950"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-15T15:15:48Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The OneSignal \u2013 Web Push Notifications plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the settings handling functionality in all versions up to, and including, 3.6.1. This is due to the plugin processing POST requests without verifying user capabilities or nonces. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to overwrite the OneSignal App ID, REST API key, and notification behavior via direct POST requests.",
"id": "GHSA-9jm2-ww3f-6gg3",
"modified": "2025-12-15T15:30:32Z",
"published": "2025-12-15T15:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-13950"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OneSignal/OneSignal-WordPress-Plugin/pull/387/files"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/cf2b5d05-24a3-4bc8-9dde-a7e8ce13ea16?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JQ7-C579-98J9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-11-03 21:32 – Updated: 2026-11-04 21:32Missing authorization in SiteIsolation in Google Chrome prior to 157.0.8103.38 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to obtain sensitive information via a crafted PDF file. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-121194"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-11-03T21:17:28Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing authorization in SiteIsolation in Google Chrome prior to 157.0.8103.38 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to obtain sensitive information via a crafted PDF file. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-9jq7-c579-98j9",
"modified": "2026-11-04T21:32:20Z",
"published": "2026-11-03T21:32:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-121194"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/11/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/566683019"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-9JR9-8FF3-M894
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-25 20:10 – Updated: 2025-07-28 13:04Summary
The HAX CMS API endpoints do not perform authorization checks when interacting with a resource. Both the JS and PHP versions of the CMS do not verify that a user has permission to interact with a resource before performing a given operation.
Details
The API endpoints within the HAX CMS application check if a user is authenticated, but don't check for authorization before performing an operation.
Affected Resources
- Operations.php: 760
createNode() - Operations.php: 868
saveNode() - Operations.php: 1171
deleteNode() - Operations.php: 1789
listSites() - Operations.php: 1890
createSite() - Operations.php: 2196
getConfig() - Operations.php: 2389
cloneSite() - Operations.php: 2467
deleteSite() - Operations.php: 2524
downloadSite() - Operations.php: 2607
archiveSite()
Note: This may not include all affected endpoints within the application.
Impact
An authenticated attacker can make requests to interact with other users' sites. This can be used to enumerate, modify, and delete other users' sites and nodes.
Additionally, an authenticated attacker can use the 'getConfig' endpoint to pull the application's configuration, which may store cleartext credentials.
PoC - /deleteNode
- Browse to the 'site.json' file for a target site, and note the ID of the item to delete.
- Make a POST request to the 'deleteNode' endpoint with a valid JWT and the target object ID.
Site before editing:
Site after editing:
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.0.14"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "elmsln/haxcms"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.0.14"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-54378"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-07-25T20:10:22Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-26T04:16:05Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe HAX CMS API endpoints do not perform authorization checks when interacting with a resource. Both the JS and PHP versions of the CMS do not verify that a user has permission to interact with a resource before performing a given operation.\n\n### Details\n\nThe API endpoints within the HAX CMS application check if a user is authenticated, but don\u0027t check for authorization before performing an operation.\n\n#### Affected Resources\n\n- [Operations.php: 760](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L760) `createNode()`\n- [Operations.php: 868](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L868) `saveNode()`\n- [Operations.php: 1171](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L1171) `deleteNode()`\n- [Operations.php: 1789](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L1789) `listSites()`\n- [Operations.php: 1890](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L1890) `createSite()`\n- [Operations.php: 2196](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L2195) `getConfig()`\n- [Operations.php: 2389](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L2389) `cloneSite()`\n- [Operations.php: 2467](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L2467) `deleteSite()`\n- [Operations.php: 2524](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L2524) `downloadSite()`\n- [Operations.php: 2607](https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/blob/b158d8ba1f9602af92ab084fd03b418f953079fd/system/backend/php/lib/Operations.php#L2606) `archiveSite()`\n\n\n_Note: This may not include all affected endpoints within the application._\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated attacker can make requests to interact with other users\u0027 sites. This can be used to enumerate, modify, and delete other users\u0027 sites and nodes.\n\nAdditionally, an authenticated attacker can use the \u0027getConfig\u0027 endpoint to pull the application\u0027s configuration, which may store cleartext credentials.\n\n### PoC - /deleteNode\n\n1. Browse to the \u0027site.json\u0027 file for a target site, and note the ID of the item to delete.\n\n\n\n2. Make a POST request to the \u0027deleteNode\u0027 endpoint with a valid JWT and the target object ID.\n\n\n\nSite before editing:\n\n\n\nSite after editing:\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-9jr9-8ff3-m894",
"modified": "2025-07-28T13:04:31Z",
"published": "2025-07-25T20:10:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/haxtheweb/issues/security/advisories/GHSA-9jr9-8ff3-m894"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-54378"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-nodejs/commit/5826e9b7f3d8c7c7635411768b86b199fad36969"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/haxtheweb/haxcms-php/commit/24d30222481ada037597c4d7c0a51a1ef7af6cfd"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "HAX CMS API Lacks Authorization Checks"
}
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.