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
19905 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-CWC3-P92J-G7QM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-06 22:20 – Updated: 2026-03-09 13:15Summary
The Flowise platform has a critical Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability combined with a Business Logic Flaw in the PUT /api/v1/loginmethod endpoint.
While the endpoint requires authentication, it fails to validate if the authenticated user has ownership or administrative rights over the target organizationId. This allows any low-privileged user (including "Free" plan users) to:
- Overwrite the SSO configuration of any other organization.
- Enable "Enterprise-only" features (SSO/SAML) without a license.
- Perform Account Takeover by redirecting the authentication flow.
Details
The backend accepts the organizationId parameter from the JSON body and updates the database record corresponding to that ID. There is no middleware or logic check to ensure request.user.organizationId === body.organizationId.
PoC
Prerequisites: 1. The attacker creates a standard "Free" account and obtains a valid JWT token (Cookie/Header). 2. The attacker identifies the target organizationId (e.g., bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d).
Step-by-Step Exploitation: The attacker sends the following PUT request to overwrite the victim's Google SSO configuration.
Request:
PUT /api/v1/loginmethod HTTP/2
Host: cloud.flowiseai.com
Cookie: token=<ATTACKER_JWT_TOKEN>
Content-Type: application/json
Accept: application/json
{
"organizationId": "bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d",
"userId": "6ab311fa-0d0a-4bd6-996e-4ae721377fb2",
"providers": [
{
"providerLabel": "Google",
"providerName": "google",
"config": {
"clientID": "ATTACKER_MALICIOUS_CLIENT_ID",
"clientSecret": "ATTACKER_MALICIOUS_SECRET"
},
"status": "enable"
}
]
}
Response: The server responds with 200 OK, confirming the modification has been applied to the victim's organization context.
{
"status": "OK",
"organizationId": "bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d"
}
Impact
- Account Takeover: An attacker can replace a victim organization's legitimate OAuth credentials (e.g., Google Client ID) with their own malicious application credentials. When victim employees try to log in via SSO, they are authenticated against the attacker's application, potentially allowing the attacker to hijack sessions or steal credentials.
- License Control Bypass: Users on the "Free" tier can illicitly enable and configure SSO providers (Azure, Okta, etc.), which are features strictly restricted to the "Enterprise" plan.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.0.12"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "flowise"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.0.13"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-30823"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-639",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-06T22:20:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-07T06:16:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nThe Flowise platform has a critical Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability combined with a Business Logic Flaw in the PUT /api/v1/loginmethod endpoint.\n\nWhile the endpoint requires authentication, it fails to validate if the authenticated user has ownership or administrative rights over the target organizationId. This allows any low-privileged user (including \"Free\" plan users) to:\n\n1. Overwrite the SSO configuration of any other organization.\n2. Enable \"Enterprise-only\" features (SSO/SAML) without a license.\n3. Perform Account Takeover by redirecting the authentication flow.\n\n### Details\nThe backend accepts the organizationId parameter from the JSON body and updates the database record corresponding to that ID. There is no middleware or logic check to ensure request.user.organizationId === body.organizationId.\n\n### PoC\nPrerequisites:\n1. The attacker creates a standard \"Free\" account and obtains a valid JWT token (Cookie/Header).\n2. The attacker identifies the target organizationId (e.g., bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d).\n\n**Step-by-Step Exploitation**: The attacker sends the following PUT request to overwrite the victim\u0027s Google SSO configuration.\n\n**Request**:\n\n```http\nPUT /api/v1/loginmethod HTTP/2\nHost: cloud.flowiseai.com\nCookie: token=\u003cATTACKER_JWT_TOKEN\u003e\nContent-Type: application/json\nAccept: application/json\n\n{\n \"organizationId\": \"bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d\",\n \"userId\": \"6ab311fa-0d0a-4bd6-996e-4ae721377fb2\", \n \"providers\": [\n {\n \"providerLabel\": \"Google\",\n \"providerName\": \"google\",\n \"config\": {\n \"clientID\": \"ATTACKER_MALICIOUS_CLIENT_ID\",\n \"clientSecret\": \"ATTACKER_MALICIOUS_SECRET\"\n },\n \"status\": \"enable\"\n }\n ]\n}\n```\n\n**Response**: The server responds with 200 OK, confirming the modification has been applied to the victim\u0027s organization context.\n\n```json\n{\n \"status\": \"OK\",\n \"organizationId\": \"bd2b74e0-e0cd-4bb5-ba98-3cc2ae683d5d\"\n}\n```\n\n### Impact\n\n- **Account Takeover**: An attacker can replace a victim organization\u0027s legitimate OAuth credentials (e.g., Google Client ID) with their own malicious application credentials. When victim employees try to log in via SSO, they are authenticated against the attacker\u0027s application, potentially allowing the attacker to hijack sessions or steal credentials.\n- **License Control Bypass**: Users on the \"Free\" tier can illicitly enable and configure SSO providers (Azure, Okta, etc.), which are features strictly restricted to the \"Enterprise\" plan.",
"id": "GHSA-cwc3-p92j-g7qm",
"modified": "2026-03-09T13:15:47Z",
"published": "2026-03-06T22:20:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FlowiseAI/Flowise/security/advisories/GHSA-cwc3-p92j-g7qm"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-30823"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/FlowiseAI/Flowise"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/FlowiseAI/Flowise/releases/tag/flowise%403.0.13"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Flowise has IDOR leading to Account Takeover and Enterprise Feature Bypass via SSO Configuration"
}
GHSA-CWCC-8WQW-36GF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-27 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:51A flaw was found in APICast, when 3Scale's OIDC module does not properly evaluate the response to a mismatched token from a separate realm. This could allow a separate realm to be accessible to an attacker, permitting access to unauthorized information.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-0456"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-09-27T15:16:03Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in APICast, when 3Scale\u0027s OIDC module does not properly evaluate the response to a mismatched token from a separate realm. This could allow a separate realm to be accessible to an attacker, permitting access to unauthorized information.",
"id": "GHSA-cwcc-8wqw-36gf",
"modified": "2024-04-04T07:51:14Z",
"published": "2023-09-27T15:30:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-0456"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-0456"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2163586"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-CWGH-CF2V-VQFH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:48 – Updated: 2022-12-03 15:30IBM Security Access Manager 9.0.1 through 9.0.6 does not prove that a user's identity is correct which can lead to the exposure of resources or functionality to unintended actors. IBM X-Force ID: 158574.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-4158"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-25T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "IBM Security Access Manager 9.0.1 through 9.0.6 does not prove that a user\u0027s identity is correct which can lead to the exposure of resources or functionality to unintended actors. IBM X-Force ID: 158574.",
"id": "GHSA-cwgh-cf2v-vqfh",
"modified": "2022-12-03T15:30:27Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:48:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-4158"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/158574"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=ibm10888379"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-CWJ3-QFFG-4FM2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-18 06:32 – Updated: 2026-10-18 06:32A vulnerability has been found in David-Crty Databasement up to 1.8.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file app/Http/Requests/Api/V1/SaveScheduledRestoreRequest.php of the component Scheduled Restore. Such manipulation of the argument schema_name leads to missing authorization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 1.8.2 addresses this issue. It is suggested to upgrade the affected component.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-111875"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-18T06:16:56Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been found in David-Crty Databasement up to 1.8.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file app/Http/Requests/Api/V1/SaveScheduledRestoreRequest.php of the component Scheduled Restore. Such manipulation of the argument schema_name leads to missing authorization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 1.8.2 addresses this issue. It is suggested to upgrade the affected component.",
"id": "GHSA-cwj3-qffg-4fm2",
"modified": "2026-10-18T06:32:22Z",
"published": "2026-10-18T06:32:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/David-Crty/databasement/security/advisories/GHSA-3rjj-69wh-r95f"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-111875"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/David-Crty/databasement"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/David-Crty/databasement/releases/tag/v1.8.2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-111875"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/1005220"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/421587"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/421587/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-CWJ3-VQPP-PMXR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-05 18:44 – Updated: 2026-05-05 18:44Summary
The agent-facing gateway tool protects config.apply and config.patch with a model-to-operator trust boundary. That guard used a hand-maintained denylist of protected config paths. The config schema outgrew that denylist, leaving sensitive subtrees writable through model-driven gateway config mutations.
Impact
A prompt-injected or otherwise compromised model running with access to the owner-only gateway tool could persist unsafe config changes that crossed security boundaries. Examples included config paths affecting command execution, network/proxy/TLS behavior, credential forwarding, telemetry or hook endpoints, memory/indexing surfaces, and operator policy controls. These changes could survive restart once written to config.
Affected Packages / Versions
- Package:
openclawon npm - Affected: versions before
2026.4.23 - Fixed:
2026.4.23 - Latest stable verified fixed:
openclaw@2026.4.23, tagv2026.4.23
Fix
OpenClaw replaced the denylist with a fail-closed allowlist. Agent-driven gateway config.apply and gateway config.patch now permit only narrow agent-tunable prompt/model settings and mention-gating paths. Other config changes are rejected before the gateway mutation RPC is invoked.
Fix Commit(s)
bceda6089aa7b3695cc7696b43c61ae3d01bb0ec(fix(gateway): fail closed on runtime config edits)
Severity
Severity remains high. The vulnerable entry point is owner-only, but the model/agent is not a trusted principal under OpenClaw's security model, and the guard is the explicit model-to-operator boundary for persisted config mutation.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.4.23"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-05T18:44:31Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nThe agent-facing `gateway` tool protects `config.apply` and `config.patch` with a model-to-operator trust boundary. That guard used a hand-maintained denylist of protected config paths. The config schema outgrew that denylist, leaving sensitive subtrees writable through model-driven gateway config mutations.\n\n## Impact\n\nA prompt-injected or otherwise compromised model running with access to the owner-only `gateway` tool could persist unsafe config changes that crossed security boundaries. Examples included config paths affecting command execution, network/proxy/TLS behavior, credential forwarding, telemetry or hook endpoints, memory/indexing surfaces, and operator policy controls. These changes could survive restart once written to config.\n\n## Affected Packages / Versions\n\n- Package: `openclaw` on npm\n- Affected: versions before `2026.4.23`\n- Fixed: `2026.4.23`\n- Latest stable verified fixed: `openclaw@2026.4.23`, tag `v2026.4.23`\n\n## Fix\n\nOpenClaw replaced the denylist with a fail-closed allowlist. Agent-driven `gateway config.apply` and `gateway config.patch` now permit only narrow agent-tunable prompt/model settings and mention-gating paths. Other config changes are rejected before the gateway mutation RPC is invoked.\n\n## Fix Commit(s)\n\n- `bceda6089aa7b3695cc7696b43c61ae3d01bb0ec` (`fix(gateway): fail closed on runtime config edits`)\n\n## Severity\n\nSeverity remains `high`. The vulnerable entry point is owner-only, but the model/agent is not a trusted principal under OpenClaw\u0027s security model, and the guard is the explicit model-to-operator boundary for persisted config mutation.",
"id": "GHSA-cwj3-vqpp-pmxr",
"modified": "2026-05-05T18:44:31Z",
"published": "2026-05-05T18:44:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-cwj3-vqpp-pmxr"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/bceda6089aa7b3695cc7696b43c61ae3d01bb0ec"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw\u0027s gateway config mutation guard allowed unsafe model-driven config writes"
}
GHSA-CWJP-XWRC-RMGF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-21 21:30 – Updated: 2025-01-21 21:30Vulnerability in the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools product of Oracle JD Edwards (component: Design Tools SEC). Supported versions that are affected are Prior to 9.2.9.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.1 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-21527"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-21T21:15:18Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Vulnerability in the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools product of Oracle JD Edwards (component: Design Tools SEC). Supported versions that are affected are Prior to 9.2.9.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Tools accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.1 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).",
"id": "GHSA-cwjp-xwrc-rmgf",
"modified": "2025-01-21T21:30:55Z",
"published": "2025-01-21T21:30:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21527"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujan2025.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-CWMQ-J8R4-3W7R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-16 09:31 – Updated: 2026-01-20 15:32Missing Authorization vulnerability in ThemeNectar Salient Core salient-core allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Salient Core: from n/a through <= 3.0.8.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-59001"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-16T09:15:52Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in ThemeNectar Salient Core salient-core allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Salient Core: from n/a through \u003c= 3.0.8.",
"id": "GHSA-cwmq-j8r4-3w7r",
"modified": "2026-01-20T15:32:12Z",
"published": "2025-12-16T09:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59001"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/salient-core/vulnerability/wordpress-salient-core-plugin-3-0-8-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vdp.patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/salient-core/vulnerability/wordpress-salient-core-plugin-3-0-8-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-CWQ6-MJMX-47P6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-12-12 19:21 – Updated: 2024-12-12 22:31Impact
Any user with an account on the main wiki could run scheduling operations on subwikis.
To reproduce, as a user on the main wiki without any special right, view the document Scheduler.WebHome in a subwiki. Then, click on any operation (e.g., Trigger) on any job. If the operation is successful, then the instance is vulnerable.
Patches
This has been patched in XWiki 15.10.9 and 16.3.0.
Workarounds
If you have subwikis where the Job Scheduler is enabled, you can edit the objects on Scheduler.WebPreferences to match https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/54bcc5a7a2e440cc591b91eece9c13dc0c487331#diff-8e274bd0065e319a34090339de6dfe56193144d15fd71c52c1be7272254728b4.
References
- https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-21663
- https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/54bcc5a7a2e440cc591b91eece9c13dc0c487331
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in Jira XWiki.org * Email us at Security Mailing List
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.xwiki.platform:xwiki-platform-scheduler-ui"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.2-milestone-2"
},
{
"fixed": "15.10.9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.xwiki.platform:xwiki-platform-scheduler-ui"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "16.0.0-rc-1"
},
{
"fixed": "16.3.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-55876"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-12-12T19:21:16Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-12-12T19:15:14Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\nAny user with an account on the main wiki could run scheduling operations on subwikis.\nTo reproduce, as a user on the main wiki without any special right, view the document `Scheduler.WebHome` in a subwiki. Then, click on any operation (*e.g.,* Trigger) on any job. If the operation is successful, then the instance is vulnerable.\n\n### Patches\nThis has been patched in XWiki 15.10.9 and 16.3.0.\n\n### Workarounds\nIf you have subwikis where the Job Scheduler is enabled, you can edit the objects on `Scheduler.WebPreferences` to match https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/54bcc5a7a2e440cc591b91eece9c13dc0c487331#diff-8e274bd0065e319a34090339de6dfe56193144d15fd71c52c1be7272254728b4.\n\n### References\n* https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-21663\n* https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/54bcc5a7a2e440cc591b91eece9c13dc0c487331\n\n### For more information\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in [Jira XWiki.org](https://jira.xwiki.org/)\n* Email us at [Security Mailing List](mailto:security@xwiki.org)",
"id": "GHSA-cwq6-mjmx-47p6",
"modified": "2024-12-12T22:31:48Z",
"published": "2024-12-12T19:21:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/security/advisories/GHSA-cwq6-mjmx-47p6"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55876"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/54bcc5a7a2e440cc591b91eece9c13dc0c487331"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-21663"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "XWiki\u0027s scheduler in subwiki allows scheduling operations for any main wiki user"
}
GHSA-CWV5-G62V-46HH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-11-07 12:31 – Updated: 2026-11-07 12:31Missing Authorization vulnerability in Brainstorm Force CartFlows cartflows allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects CartFlows: from n/a through 3.3.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-120853"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-11-07T10:17:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Brainstorm Force CartFlows cartflows allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects CartFlows: from n/a through 3.3.0.",
"id": "GHSA-cwv5-g62v-46hh",
"modified": "2026-11-07T12:31:50Z",
"published": "2026-11-07T12:31:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-120853"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/cartflows/vulnerability/wordpress-cartflows-plugin-3-3-0-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:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-CWVG-5CH6-2HQ6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-15 21:30 – Updated: 2026-06-15 21:30Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in TrueBooker <= 1.1.9 versions.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-48881"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-15T21:17:17Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in TrueBooker \u003c= 1.1.9 versions.",
"id": "GHSA-cwvg-5ch6-2hq6",
"modified": "2026-06-15T21:30:48Z",
"published": "2026-06-15T21:30:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-48881"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/truebooker-appointment-booking/vulnerability/wordpress-truebooker-plugin-1-1-9-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:H/I:H/A:N",
"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.