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
20063 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-HQRX-GCPG-FWJ7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-12-13 15:30 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:35Missing Authorization vulnerability in WPDeveloper Essential Blocks for Gutenberg allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Essential Blocks for Gutenberg: from n/a through 3.8.5.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-47594"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-12-13T15:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in WPDeveloper Essential Blocks for Gutenberg allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Essential Blocks for Gutenberg: from n/a through 3.8.5.",
"id": "GHSA-hqrx-gcpg-fwj7",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:35:23Z",
"published": "2024-12-13T15:30:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-47594"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/essential-blocks/vulnerability/wordpress-essential-blocks-for-gutenberg-plugin-3-8-5-broken-access-control?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HQVX-6C75-72M4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-23 15:31 – Updated: 2026-01-27 18:32Missing Authorization vulnerability in Prince Integrate Google Drive integrate-google-drive allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Integrate Google Drive: from n/a through <= 1.5.5.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-24540"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-23T15:16:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Prince Integrate Google Drive integrate-google-drive allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Integrate Google Drive: from n/a through \u003c= 1.5.5.",
"id": "GHSA-hqvx-6c75-72m4",
"modified": "2026-01-27T18:32:12Z",
"published": "2026-01-23T15:31:36Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-24540"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/integrate-google-drive/vulnerability/wordpress-integrate-google-drive-plugin-1-5-5-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:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HQVX-HXRC-X42R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-05 09:31 – Updated: 2026-08-05 09:31The Easy Post Submission plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the create_post() function in all versions up to, and including, 2.3.0. This is due to the rbsm_submit_post AJAX action being registered for unauthenticated users via wp_ajax_nopriv_rbsm_submit_post without any authorization checks when a postId parameter is supplied. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify the title, content, excerpt, categories, and tags of arbitrary posts, as well as change the post status to draft (effectively unpublishing them) via the 'postId' parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-4431"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-08-05T08:16:33Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The Easy Post Submission plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the `create_post()` function in all versions up to, and including, 2.3.0. This is due to the `rbsm_submit_post` AJAX action being registered for unauthenticated users via `wp_ajax_nopriv_rbsm_submit_post` without any authorization checks when a `postId` parameter is supplied. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify the title, content, excerpt, categories, and tags of arbitrary posts, as well as change the post status to draft (effectively unpublishing them) via the \u0027postId\u0027 parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-hqvx-hxrc-x42r",
"modified": "2026-08-05T09:31:16Z",
"published": "2026-08-05T09:31:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-4431"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/easy-post-submission/tags/2.2.0/includes/client-ajax-handler.php#L1157"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/easy-post-submission/tags/2.2.0/includes/client-ajax-handler.php#L38"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/easy-post-submission/tags/2.2.0/includes/client-ajax-handler.php#L974"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026new=3488045%40easy-post-submission%2Ftrunk\u0026old=3427523%40easy-post-submission%2Ftrunk"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/15494ccf-7c9d-4566-9e80-2da94172a3dd?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:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HQXM-Q759-7C9M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-10 21:31 – Updated: 2026-10-10 21:31Subscriber Broken Access Control in Jetpack VideoPress <= 3.6 versions.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-40808"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-10T20:16:34Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Subscriber Broken Access Control in Jetpack VideoPress \u003c= 3.6 versions.",
"id": "GHSA-hqxm-q759-7c9m",
"modified": "2026-10-10T21:31:17Z",
"published": "2026-10-10T21:31:17Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-40808"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/jetpack-videopress/vulnerability/wordpress-jetpack-videopress-plugin-3-6-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-HR3P-RPCP-X6MJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-12 15:37 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:34Missing Authorization vulnerability in Automattic WP Job Manager.This issue affects WP Job Manager: from n/a through 2.0.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-52211"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-12T15:15:22Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Automattic WP Job Manager.This issue affects WP Job Manager: from n/a through 2.0.0.",
"id": "GHSA-hr3p-rpcp-x6mj",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:34:38Z",
"published": "2024-04-12T15:37:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-52211"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/wp-job-manager/wordpress-wp-job-manager-plugin-2-0-0-unauthenticated-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-HR3V-8CP3-68RF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-25 00:00 – Updated: 2024-04-22 19:08HashiCorp Consul 1.8.1 up to 1.11.8, 1.12.4, and 1.13.1 did not properly validate the node or segment names prior to interpolation and usage in JWT claim assertions with the auto config RPC. Fixed in 1.11.9, 1.12.5, and 1.13.2.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/hashicorp/consul"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.8.1"
},
{
"fixed": "1.11.9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/hashicorp/consul"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.12.0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.12.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/hashicorp/consul"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.13.0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.13.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-41803"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-04-02T20:30:12Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-09-23T01:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "HashiCorp Consul 1.8.1 up to 1.11.8, 1.12.4, and 1.13.1 did not properly validate the node or segment names prior to interpolation and usage in JWT claim assertions with the auto config RPC. Fixed in 1.11.9, 1.12.5, and 1.13.2.",
"id": "GHSA-hr3v-8cp3-68rf",
"modified": "2024-04-22T19:08:30Z",
"published": "2022-09-25T00:00:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-41803"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/hashicorp/consul/pull/14577/commits/2c881259ce10e308ff03afc968c4165998fd7fee"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://discuss.hashicorp.com/t/hcsec-2022-19-consul-auto-config-jwt-authorization-missing-input-validation/44627"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/hashicorp/consul"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LYZOKMMVX4SIEHPJW3SJUQGMO5YZCPHC"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/XNF4OLYZRQE75EB5TW5N42FSXHBXGWFE"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZTE4ITXXPIWZEQ4HYQCB6N6GZIMWXDAI"
}
],
"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:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "HashiCorp Consul does not properly validate node or segment names prior to usage in JWT claim assertions"
}
GHSA-HR43-RJMR-7WMM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-08 19:38 – Updated: 2026-05-15 23:52Mass Assignment via Pydantic extra='allow' Allows Creating Folders in Other Users' Accounts
Affected Component
Folder creation endpoint and form model:
- backend/open_webui/models/folders.py (lines 72-77, FolderForm with extra='allow')
- backend/open_webui/models/folders.py (lines 95-106, insert_new_folder dict construction)
- backend/open_webui/routers/folders.py (line 119, create_folder endpoint)
Affected Versions
Current main branch (commit 6fdd19bf1) and likely all versions since FolderForm adopted extra='allow'.
Description
FolderForm uses model_config = ConfigDict(extra='allow'), which permits arbitrary fields to pass through Pydantic validation and be included in model_dump(exclude_unset=True). In insert_new_folder, the server-assigned user_id is placed at the start of the dict and then overwritten by the spread of form data:
# models/folders.py:95-106
folder = FolderModel(
**{
'id': id, # server
'user_id': user_id, # server — overwritten below
**(form_data.model_dump(exclude_unset=True) or {}), # user-controlled (extra='allow')
'parent_id': parent_id,
'created_at': int(time.time()),
'updated_at': int(time.time()),
}
)
Because FolderModel declares user_id: str as a real field (not just a form extra), any attacker-supplied user_id in the POST body is accepted by the model and persisted on the Folder row.
Attack Scenario
- Attacker discovers a victim's user ID. User UUIDs commonly leak via the user search endpoint (
GET /api/v1/users/search, intentionally accessible to verified users for sharing UI), shared chat metadata, or channel member lists. - Attacker sends:
POST /api/v1/folders/ { "name": "Important: Click here", "user_id": "<victim_user_id>", "meta": {"icon": "warning"}, "data": {...} } - Pydantic accepts the extra
user_idfield (allowed byextra='allow'). insert_new_folderspreads the form data over the server-set'user_id': user_id, overwriting it with the attacker's value.- The
Folderrow is persisted withuser_id = <victim_user_id>. - The victim sees the attacker-planted folder in their UI on next load because
GET /api/v1/folders/filters by the viewer's ownuser_id.
The attacker can repeat this to plant multiple folders, use crafted name values for phishing ("Click here to recover account" / "Security alert"), and abuse the meta and data fields to add visual elements that further mimic legitimate content.
Impact
- Unauthorized write into victim's folder tree
- Phishing surface: attacker-controlled
name,meta, anddatarender in the victim's UI in a trusted context - DoS / spam: attacker can flood a victim with arbitrary folders; victim must manually delete each one
- Attacker cannot read the folder back — all read paths filter by the caller's own
user_id— so confidentiality is preserved, but integrity and trust are compromised
Preconditions
- Attacker must have an authenticated account with
features.folderspermission (default for all users) - Attacker must know or guess the victim's user UUID (obtainable through various non-sensitive endpoints)
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.8.12"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "open-webui"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.9.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-44550"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-08T19:38:54Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-15T20:16:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "# Mass Assignment via Pydantic extra=\u0027allow\u0027 Allows Creating Folders in Other Users\u0027 Accounts\n\n## Affected Component\n\nFolder creation endpoint and form model:\n- `backend/open_webui/models/folders.py` (lines 72-77, `FolderForm` with `extra=\u0027allow\u0027`)\n- `backend/open_webui/models/folders.py` (lines 95-106, `insert_new_folder` dict construction)\n- `backend/open_webui/routers/folders.py` (line 119, `create_folder` endpoint)\n\n## Affected Versions\n\nCurrent main branch (commit `6fdd19bf1`) and likely all versions since `FolderForm` adopted `extra=\u0027allow\u0027`.\n\n## Description\n\n`FolderForm` uses `model_config = ConfigDict(extra=\u0027allow\u0027)`, which permits arbitrary fields to pass through Pydantic validation and be included in `model_dump(exclude_unset=True)`. In `insert_new_folder`, the server-assigned `user_id` is placed at the start of the dict and then overwritten by the spread of form data:\n\n```python\n# models/folders.py:95-106\nfolder = FolderModel(\n **{\n \u0027id\u0027: id, # server\n \u0027user_id\u0027: user_id, # server \u2014 overwritten below\n **(form_data.model_dump(exclude_unset=True) or {}), # user-controlled (extra=\u0027allow\u0027)\n \u0027parent_id\u0027: parent_id,\n \u0027created_at\u0027: int(time.time()),\n \u0027updated_at\u0027: int(time.time()),\n }\n)\n```\n\nBecause `FolderModel` declares `user_id: str` as a real field (not just a form extra), any attacker-supplied `user_id` in the POST body is accepted by the model and persisted on the `Folder` row.\n\n## Attack Scenario\n\n1. Attacker discovers a victim\u0027s user ID. User UUIDs commonly leak via the user search endpoint (`GET /api/v1/users/search`, intentionally accessible to verified users for sharing UI), shared chat metadata, or channel member lists.\n2. Attacker sends:\n ```\n POST /api/v1/folders/\n {\n \"name\": \"Important: Click here\",\n \"user_id\": \"\u003cvictim_user_id\u003e\",\n \"meta\": {\"icon\": \"warning\"},\n \"data\": {...}\n }\n ```\n3. Pydantic accepts the extra `user_id` field (allowed by `extra=\u0027allow\u0027`).\n4. `insert_new_folder` spreads the form data over the server-set `\u0027user_id\u0027: user_id`, overwriting it with the attacker\u0027s value.\n5. The `Folder` row is persisted with `user_id = \u003cvictim_user_id\u003e`.\n6. The victim sees the attacker-planted folder in their UI on next load because `GET /api/v1/folders/` filters by the viewer\u0027s own `user_id`.\n\nThe attacker can repeat this to plant multiple folders, use crafted `name` values for phishing (\"Click here to recover account\" / \"Security alert\"), and abuse the `meta` and `data` fields to add visual elements that further mimic legitimate content.\n\n## Impact\n\n- Unauthorized write into victim\u0027s folder tree\n- Phishing surface: attacker-controlled `name`, `meta`, and `data` render in the victim\u0027s UI in a trusted context\n- DoS / spam: attacker can flood a victim with arbitrary folders; victim must manually delete each one\n- Attacker cannot read the folder back \u2014 all read paths filter by the caller\u0027s own `user_id` \u2014 so confidentiality is preserved, but integrity and trust are compromised\n\n## Preconditions\n\n- Attacker must have an authenticated account with `features.folders` permission (default for all users)\n- Attacker must know or guess the victim\u0027s user UUID (obtainable through various non-sensitive endpoints)",
"id": "GHSA-hr43-rjmr-7wmm",
"modified": "2026-05-15T23:52:16Z",
"published": "2026-05-08T19:38:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/security/advisories/GHSA-hr43-rjmr-7wmm"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-44550"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Open WebUI\u0027s Mass Assignment via Pydantic extra=\u0027allow\u0027 Allows Creating Folders in Other Users\u0027 Accounts"
}
GHSA-HR4R-2PV8-Q3J3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-19 18:31 – Updated: 2026-02-19 21:30Missing Authorization vulnerability in raratheme Spa and Salon spa-and-salon allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Spa and Salon: from n/a through <= 1.3.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25374"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-19T09:16:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in raratheme Spa and Salon spa-and-salon allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Spa and Salon: from n/a through \u003c= 1.3.2.",
"id": "GHSA-hr4r-2pv8-q3j3",
"modified": "2026-02-19T21:30:45Z",
"published": "2026-02-19T18:31:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25374"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Theme/spa-and-salon/vulnerability/wordpress-spa-and-salon-theme-1-3-2-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-HR55-WHQV-38V8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-29 00:31 – Updated: 2026-10-29 00:31Bricks Builder 2.4.3 and before contains a broken access control vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to access restricted post content by submitting crafted post_status and post_type values in the originalQueryVars parameter to the POST /wp-json/bricks/v1/query_result REST endpoint using a publicly obtainable nonce. Attackers can set post_status to draft or private, or post_type to shop_coupon, to disclose unpublished posts, private content, and WooCommerce coupon data that is otherwise blocked by the standard WordPress REST API routes.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-118804"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-28T22:17:14Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Bricks Builder 2.4.3 and before contains a broken access control vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to access restricted post content by submitting crafted post_status and post_type values in the originalQueryVars parameter to the POST /wp-json/bricks/v1/query_result REST endpoint using a publicly obtainable nonce. Attackers can set post_status to draft or private, or post_type to shop_coupon, to disclose unpublished posts, private content, and WooCommerce coupon data that is otherwise blocked by the standard WordPress REST API routes.",
"id": "GHSA-hr55-whqv-38v8",
"modified": "2026-10-29T00:31:25Z",
"published": "2026-10-29T00:31:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-118804"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bricksbuilder.io/release/bricks-2-4-4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/bricks-broken-access-control-via-query-result-endpoint"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-HR59-W483-QHFF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-12-25 06:30 – Updated: 2024-12-25 06:30The Contact Form by Bit Form: Multi Step Form, Calculation Contact Form, Payment Contact Form & Custom Contact Form builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access of data due to a missing capability check on the bitform-form-entry-edit endpoint in all versions up to, and including, 2.17.3. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to view all form submissions from other users.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-12190"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-12-25T04:15:06Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Contact Form by Bit Form: Multi Step Form, Calculation Contact Form, Payment Contact Form \u0026 Custom Contact Form builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access of data due to a missing capability check on the bitform-form-entry-edit endpoint in all versions up to, and including, 2.17.3. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to view all form submissions from other users.",
"id": "GHSA-hr59-w483-qhff",
"modified": "2024-12-25T06:30:46Z",
"published": "2024-12-25T06:30:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12190"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3204875/bit-form/trunk/includes/Frontend/FormEntryView.php"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3209668/bit-form/trunk/includes/Frontend/FormEntryView.php"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/ce9dab37-4118-4e13-857c-9aa072d25edf?source=cve"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
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.