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
19894 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-C5JG-HQQG-WR3V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-05 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:36Missing Authorization vulnerability in DesertThemes SoftMe allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects SoftMe: from n/a through 1.1.24.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-58817"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-09-05T14:15:52Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in DesertThemes SoftMe allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects SoftMe: from n/a through 1.1.24.",
"id": "GHSA-c5jg-hqqg-wr3v",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:36:05Z",
"published": "2025-09-05T15:31:08Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-58817"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/theme/softme/vulnerability/wordpress-softme-theme-1-1-24-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-C5M5-9W4F-FJP9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-21 00:32 – Updated: 2026-10-21 00:32Improper input validation in API in Google Chrome prior to 156.0.8078.47 allowed a remote attacker to potentially execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-113062"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-20",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-20T22:18:57Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper input validation in API in Google Chrome prior to 156.0.8078.47 allowed a remote attacker to potentially execute arbitrary code inside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-c5m5-9w4f-fjp9",
"modified": "2026-10-21T00:32:40Z",
"published": "2026-10-21T00:32:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-113062"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/10/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_02018666648.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/562237871"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-C5Q4-VHQV-P6FJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-02 18:32 – Updated: 2026-09-02 18:32In Jenkins 2.579 and earlier, LTS 2.568.2 and earlier, the build CLI command does not check the Item/Cancel permission when using the -s flag to cancel a build triggered to wait for completion, allowing attackers with Item/Build permission to cancel builds started by other users.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-84657"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-02T16:17:30Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In Jenkins 2.579 and earlier, LTS 2.568.2 and earlier, the build CLI command does not check the Item/Cancel permission when using the -s flag to cancel a build triggered to wait for completion, allowing attackers with Item/Build permission to cancel builds started by other users.",
"id": "GHSA-c5q4-vhqv-p6fj",
"modified": "2026-09-02T18:32:13Z",
"published": "2026-09-02T18:32:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-84657"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2026-09-02/#SECURITY-4015"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-C5QM-9J4F-82MG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-16 09:30 – Updated: 2026-10-16 09:30Mattermost versions 11.10.x <= 11.10.0, 11.7.x <= 11.7.9, 11.9.x <= 11.9.1, 11.8.x <= 11.8.5 fail to enforce DM/GM check on server side which allows an authenticated user to quarantine a post belonging to DM or GM via direct API call.. Mattermost Advisory ID: MMSA-2026-00756
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-18795"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-16T07:17:12Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Mattermost versions 11.10.x \u003c= 11.10.0, 11.7.x \u003c= 11.7.9, 11.9.x \u003c= 11.9.1, 11.8.x \u003c= 11.8.5 fail to enforce DM/GM check on server side which allows an authenticated user to quarantine a post belonging to DM or GM via direct API call.. Mattermost Advisory ID: MMSA-2026-00756",
"id": "GHSA-c5qm-9j4f-82mg",
"modified": "2026-10-16T09:30:28Z",
"published": "2026-10-16T09:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-18795"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://mattermost.com/security-updates"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-C5R5-M73V-M265
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-26 21:36 – Updated: 2026-11-03 21:31A logic issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Golden Gate 27.2, macOS Sequoia 15.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.7.2. An app may bypass Gatekeeper checks.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-112428"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-26T21:17:32Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A logic issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Golden Gate 27.2, macOS Sequoia 15.8.2, macOS Tahoe 26.7.2. An app may bypass Gatekeeper checks.",
"id": "GHSA-c5r5-m73v-m265",
"modified": "2026-11-03T21:31:49Z",
"published": "2026-10-26T21:36:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-112428"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/149521"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/149522"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/149523"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-C5VJ-WP4V-MMVX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-19 22:08 – Updated: 2023-07-19 22:08Impact
In Hazelcast Platform, 5.0 through 5.0.4, 5.1 through 5.1.6, and 5.2 through 5.2.3, and Hazelcast IMDG (all versions up to 4.2.z), Executor Services don't check client permissions properly, allowing authenticated users to execute tasks on members without the required permissions granted.
Patches
Fix versions: 5.3.0, 5.2.4, 5.1.7, 5.0.5
Workarounds
Users are only affected when they already use executor services (i.e., an instance exists as a distributed data structure).
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.2.3"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.2.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.1.6"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.1.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.0.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.2.3"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast-enterprise"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.2.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.1.6"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast-enterprise"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.1.7"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.0.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.hazelcast:hazelcast-enterprise"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-33265"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-19T22:08:40Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-07-18T16:15:11Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\nIn Hazelcast Platform, 5.0 through 5.0.4, 5.1 through 5.1.6, and 5.2 through 5.2.3, and Hazelcast IMDG (all versions up to 4.2.z), Executor Services don\u0027t check client permissions properly, allowing authenticated users to execute tasks on members without the required permissions granted.\n\n### Patches\nFix versions: 5.3.0, 5.2.4, 5.1.7, 5.0.5\n\n### Workarounds\nUsers are only affected when they already use executor services (i.e., an instance exists as a distributed data structure).\n\n",
"id": "GHSA-c5vj-wp4v-mmvx",
"modified": "2023-07-19T22:08:40Z",
"published": "2023-07-19T22:08:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast/security/advisories/GHSA-c5vj-wp4v-mmvx"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-33265"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast/releases/tag/v5.0.5"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast/releases/tag/v5.1.7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/hazelcast/hazelcast/releases/tag/v5.2.4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.hazelcast.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-for-CVE-2023-33265"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Hazelcast Executor Services don\u0027t check client permissions properly"
}
GHSA-C5VX-G5WG-GGF7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-04 00:00 – Updated: 2022-05-12 00:01In aee daemon, there is a possible information disclosure due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local information disclosure with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS06383944; Issue ID: ALPS06270804.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-20100"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-05-03T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In aee daemon, there is a possible information disclosure due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local information disclosure with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS06383944; Issue ID: ALPS06270804.",
"id": "GHSA-c5vx-g5wg-ggf7",
"modified": "2022-05-12T00:01:59Z",
"published": "2022-05-04T00:00:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-20100"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://corp.mediatek.com/product-security-bulletin/May-2022"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-C5W7-M8WF-XC77
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-17 12:31 – Updated: 2026-02-18 22:39Apache NiFi 1.1.0 through 2.7.2 are missing authorization when updating configuration properties on extension components that have specific Required Permissions based on the Restricted annotation. The Restricted annotation indicates additional privileges required to add the annotated component to the flow configuration, but framework authorization did not check restricted status when updating a component previously added. The missing authorization requires a more privileged user to add a restricted component to the flow configuration, but permits a less privileged user to make property configuration changes. Apache NiFi installations that do not implement different levels of authorization for Restricted components are not subject to this vulnerability because the framework enforces write permissions as the security boundary. Upgrading to Apache NiFi 2.8.0 is the recommended mitigation.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.apache.nifi:nifi-web-api"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.8.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25903"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-02-18T22:39:26Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-17T10:15:57Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Apache NiFi 1.1.0 through 2.7.2 are missing authorization when updating configuration properties on extension components that have specific Required Permissions based on the Restricted annotation. The Restricted annotation indicates additional privileges required to add the annotated component to the flow configuration, but framework authorization did not check restricted status when updating a component previously added. The missing authorization requires a more privileged user to add a restricted component to the flow configuration, but permits a less privileged user to make property configuration changes. Apache NiFi installations that do not implement different levels of authorization for Restricted components are not subject to this vulnerability because the framework enforces write permissions as the security boundary. Upgrading to Apache NiFi 2.8.0 is the recommended mitigation.",
"id": "GHSA-c5w7-m8wf-xc77",
"modified": "2026-02-18T22:39:26Z",
"published": "2026-02-17T12:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25903"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/nifi/commit/119f8881fbc3cbd0d522b0c549b841da3de01f64"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/apache/nifi"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-15567"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/jf6bkt9sk6xvshy8xyxv3vtlxd340345"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/02/16/1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/S:P/AU:Y/R:I/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Apache NiFi: Missing Authorization of Restricted Permissions for Component Updates"
}
GHSA-C629-JM42-84F5
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:57 – Updated: 2022-05-24 16:57base_sock_create in drivers/isdn/mISDN/socket.c in the AF_ISDN network module in the Linux kernel through 5.3.2 does not enforce CAP_NET_RAW, which means that unprivileged users can create a raw socket, aka CID-b91ee4aa2a21.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-17055"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-20",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-10-01T14:15:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "base_sock_create in drivers/isdn/mISDN/socket.c in the AF_ISDN network module in the Linux kernel through 5.3.2 does not enforce CAP_NET_RAW, which means that unprivileged users can create a raw socket, aka CID-b91ee4aa2a21.",
"id": "GHSA-c629-jm42-84f5",
"modified": "2022-05-24T16:57:30Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:57:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-17055"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:0790"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=0edc3f703f7bcaf550774b5d43ab727bcd0fe06b"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=b91ee4aa2a2199ba4d4650706c272985a5a32d80"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/01/msg00013.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2020/03/msg00001.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/U6JNEWGIK7QA24OIUUL67QZNJN52NB7T"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://seclists.org/bugtraq/2019/Nov/11"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4184-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4185-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4185-2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4186-1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://usn.ubuntu.com/4186-2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-11/msg00035.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2019-11/msg00039.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/155212/Slackware-Security-Advisory-Slackware-14.2-kernel-Updates.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-C63R-P9J6-XM6R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-29 09:31 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:35Missing Authorization vulnerability in ProFaceOff SSU.This issue affects SSU: from n/a through 1.5.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-33597"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-29T09:15:08Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in ProFaceOff SSU.This issue affects SSU: from n/a through 1.5.0.",
"id": "GHSA-c63r-p9j6-xm6r",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:35:00Z",
"published": "2024-04-29T09:31:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-33597"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/wp-s3-smart-upload/wordpress-ssu-plugin-1-5-0-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:N/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.