Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-863

Allowed-with-Review

Incorrect Authorization

Abstraction: Class · Status: Incomplete

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

6954 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-C8JX-96C9-8XRP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 20:22 – Updated: 2026-07-01 20:22
VLAI
Summary
SurrealDB: Field-level SELECT permissions bypassed via indexed COUNT fast paths
Details

A record user could learn the value of a hidden field by counting how many records match a guess.

When DEFINE FIELD ... PERMISSIONS FOR select WHERE ... hides a field's contents from a caller, and that field is indexed, running SELECT count() FROM t WHERE hidden_field = "guess" GROUP ALL returned a count greater than zero whenever a record actually had that value — even though the caller was never allowed to read the field directly. The query planner used an indexed-COUNT shortcut (Index::Count, IndexCountScan, or the legacy Iterate Index Count / Iterate Index Keys paths) that counts matching index entries and skips the permission check that would normally hide the value. The same query with WITH NOINDEX correctly returned [], confirming the gap.

By repeating the count query with different guesses, an attacker can confirm or recover the contents of any restricted field they could not read through a normal SELECT.

Impact

What an attacker can do:

  • Confirm or recover values of a field protected by field-level SELECT permissions on any table they hold table-level SELECT on, provided the field is indexed.
  • Repeat the query with different guesses to read restricted field contents one value at a time.

What it can't do:

  • Read fields that are not indexed (the shortcut only fires when an index covers the predicate column).
  • Cross table, database or namespace isolation boundaries.
  • Modify data, escalate privileges, or affect availability.

Patches

The legacy planner (surrealdb/core/src/idx/planner/tree.rs) and the streaming planner (surrealdb/core/src/exec/planner/select/mod.rs) now both refuse the indexed fast path when the WHERE / ORDER tree references a field governed by a non-Full SELECT permission:

  • resolve_indexes skips any B-tree / unique index whose columns are governed by such a permission.
  • A new cond_touches_restricted_field flag is propagated; eval_count refuses a dedicated Index::Count when set.
  • The streaming planner adds cond_touches_restricted_select_field, a RestrictedIdiomChecker visitor that matches each idiom against the table's field-permission prefixes (loaded via the plan-time txn), and gates IndexCountScan emission on it.
  • The fast paths are preserved for root / owner sessions via should_check_perms_for_view.

Versions 3.1.0 and later are not affected.

Workarounds

Users unable to patch are advised to consider the following workarounds:

  • Avoid DEFINE INDEX on fields whose values are protected by field-level SELECT permissions. The class of attack is specific to the indexed fast paths.
  • Restrict the ability of record users to issue arbitrary SELECT count() … GROUP ALL queries against tables containing field-protected columns.
  • Use namespace / database isolation as the primary boundary where feasible.
Severity
4.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "surrealdb"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.1.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-01T20:22:06Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A record user could learn the value of a hidden field by counting how many records match a guess.\n\nWhen `DEFINE FIELD ... PERMISSIONS FOR select WHERE ...` hides a field\u0027s contents from a caller, and that field is indexed, running `SELECT count() FROM t WHERE hidden_field = \"guess\" GROUP ALL` returned a count greater than zero whenever a record actually had that value \u2014 even though the caller was never allowed to read the field directly. The query planner used an indexed-COUNT shortcut (`Index::Count`, `IndexCountScan`, or the legacy `Iterate Index Count` / `Iterate Index Keys` paths) that counts matching index entries and skips the permission check that would normally hide the value. The same query with `WITH NOINDEX` correctly returned `[]`, confirming the gap.\n\nBy repeating the count query with different guesses, an attacker can confirm or recover the contents of any restricted field they could not read through a normal `SELECT`.\n\n### Impact\n\nWhat an attacker **can** do:\n\n- Confirm or recover values of a field protected by field-level SELECT permissions on any table they hold table-level SELECT on, provided the field is indexed.\n- Repeat the query with different guesses to read restricted field contents one value at a time.\n\nWhat it **can\u0027t** do:\n\n- Read fields that are not indexed (the shortcut only fires when an index covers the predicate column).\n- Cross table, database or namespace isolation boundaries.\n- Modify data, escalate privileges, or affect availability.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe legacy planner (`surrealdb/core/src/idx/planner/tree.rs`) and the streaming planner (`surrealdb/core/src/exec/planner/select/mod.rs`) now both refuse the indexed fast path when the WHERE / ORDER tree references a field governed by a non-`Full` SELECT permission:\n\n- `resolve_indexes` skips any B-tree / unique index whose columns are governed by such a permission.\n- A new `cond_touches_restricted_field` flag is propagated; `eval_count` refuses a dedicated `Index::Count` when set.\n- The streaming planner adds `cond_touches_restricted_select_field`, a `RestrictedIdiomChecker` visitor that matches each idiom against the table\u0027s field-permission prefixes (loaded via the plan-time txn), and gates `IndexCountScan` emission on it.\n- The fast paths are preserved for root / owner sessions via `should_check_perms_for_view`.\n\nVersions 3.1.0 and later are not affected.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nUsers unable to patch are advised to consider the following workarounds:\n\n- Avoid `DEFINE INDEX` on fields whose values are protected by field-level SELECT permissions. The class of attack is specific to the indexed fast paths.\n- Restrict the ability of record users to issue arbitrary `SELECT count() \u2026 GROUP ALL` queries against tables containing field-protected columns.\n- Use namespace / database isolation as the primary boundary where feasible.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8jx-96c9-8xrp",
  "modified": "2026-07-01T20:22:06Z",
  "published": "2026-07-01T20:22:06Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb/security/advisories/GHSA-c8jx-96c9-8xrp"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb/pull/240"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb/commit/0c6dd021bb55b32a78a553c72bb9c0cdd414825f"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "SurrealDB: Field-level SELECT permissions bypassed via indexed COUNT fast paths"
}

GHSA-C8MV-CCVJ-9H5Q

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-07-27 00:00 – Updated: 2022-08-11 00:00
VLAI
Details

HashiCorp Vault and Vault Enterprise through 2022-07-17 have Incorrect Access Control.

Severity
9.1 (Critical)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-36129"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-07-26T23:15:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "HashiCorp Vault and Vault Enterprise through 2022-07-17 have Incorrect Access Control.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8mv-ccvj-9h5q",
  "modified": "2022-08-11T00:00:20Z",
  "published": "2022-07-27T00:00:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-36129"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://discuss.hashicorp.com"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://discuss.hashicorp.com/t/hcsec-2022-15-vault-enterprise-does-not-verify-existing-voter-status-when-joining-an-integrated-storage-ha-node/42420"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20220901-0011"
    }
  ],
  "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-C8P6-443Q-9MQJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:46 – Updated: 2022-08-25 00:00
VLAI
Details

An improper caller check vulnerability in Managed Provisioning prior to SMR APR-2021 Release 1 allows unprivileged application to install arbitrary application, grant device admin permission and then delete several installed application.

Severity
8.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-25356"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-04-09T18:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "An improper caller check vulnerability in Managed Provisioning prior to SMR APR-2021 Release 1 allows unprivileged application to install arbitrary application, grant device admin permission and then delete several installed application.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8p6-443q-9mqj",
  "modified": "2022-08-25T00:00:24Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:46:59Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-25356"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://blog.oversecured.com/Two-weeks-of-securing-Samsung-devices-Part-1"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.samsungmobile.com"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.samsungmobile.com/securityUpdate.smsb"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-C8R4-HMVH-F76V

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:21 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:21
VLAI
Details

Insufficient file permissions checking in install routine for Intel(R) Data Center Manager SDK before version 5.0.2 may allow authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.

Severity
7.8 (High)
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2019-0105"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2019-02-18T17:29:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Insufficient file permissions checking in install routine for Intel(R) Data Center Manager SDK before version 5.0.2 may allow authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8r4-hmvh-f76v",
  "modified": "2022-05-13T01:21:10Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:21:10Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-0105"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/advisories/ICSA-19-050-01"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/INTEL-SA-00215.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/107069"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-C8RC-7344-R4FF

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-08 03:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:33
VLAI
Details

An issue was discovered in Samsung Exynos Mobile Processor, Automotive Processor, and Modem (Exynos 9820, Exynos 980, Exynos 850, Exynos 1080, Exynos 2100, Exynos 2200, Exynos 1280, Exynos 1380, Exynos 1330, Exynos Modem 5123, Exynos Modem 5300, and Exynos Auto T5123. In the NAS Task, an improperly implemented security check for standard can disallow desired services for a while via consecutive NAS messages.

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-37367"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-09-08T03:15:08Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "An issue was discovered in Samsung Exynos Mobile Processor, Automotive Processor, and Modem (Exynos 9820, Exynos 980, Exynos 850, Exynos 1080, Exynos 2100, Exynos 2200, Exynos 1280, Exynos 1380, Exynos 1330, Exynos Modem 5123, Exynos Modem 5300, and Exynos Auto T5123. In the NAS Task, an improperly implemented security check for standard can disallow desired services for a while via consecutive NAS messages.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8rc-7344-r4ff",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T07:33:48Z",
  "published": "2023-09-08T03:30:20Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-37367"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://semiconductor.samsung.com/support/quality-support/product-security-updates"
    }
  ],
  "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:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-C8V3-R7GC-JMX8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-14 21:32 – Updated: 2026-07-14 21:32
VLAI
Details

Adobe Commerce is affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized read and write access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

Severity
8.2 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-47984"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-07-14T20:17:04Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Adobe Commerce is affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized read and write access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8v3-r7gc-jmx8",
  "modified": "2026-07-14T21:32:17Z",
  "published": "2026-07-14T21:32:17Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-47984"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/magento/apsb26-73.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-C8XC-GC49-4VF2

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-06-21 00:00 – Updated: 2022-06-29 00:00
VLAI
Details

The Very Simple Contact Form WordPress plugin before 11.6 exposes the solution to the captcha in the rendered contact form, both as hidden input fields and as plain text in the page, making it very easy for bots to bypass the captcha check, rendering the page a likely target for spam bots.

Severity
7.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-1801"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-287",
      "CWE-804",
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-06-20T11:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "The Very Simple Contact Form WordPress plugin before 11.6 exposes the solution to the captcha in the rendered contact form, both as hidden input fields and as plain text in the page, making it very easy for bots to bypass the captcha check, rendering the page a likely target for spam bots.",
  "id": "GHSA-c8xc-gc49-4vf2",
  "modified": "2022-06-29T00:00:27Z",
  "published": "2022-06-21T00:00:47Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-1801"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/a5c97809-2ffc-4efb-8c80-1b734361cd06"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-C96P-5383-3RQM

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-04 18:31 – Updated: 2026-09-04 18:31
VLAI
Details

IBM i 7.6, 7.5, and 7.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to modify certain system messages due to improper authorization.

Severity
4.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-16941"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-04T17:16:52Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "IBM i 7.6, 7.5, and 7.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to modify certain system messages due to improper authorization.",
  "id": "GHSA-c96p-5383-3rqm",
  "modified": "2026-09-04T18:31:30Z",
  "published": "2026-09-04T18:31:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-16941"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7285848"
    }
  ],
  "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-C9CM-5J82-M6PJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-24 21:31 – Updated: 2024-11-18 16:26
VLAI
Summary
fabedge has insecure permissions
Details

Insecure permissions in fabedge v0.8.1 allows attackers to access sensitive data and escalate privileges by obtaining the service account's token.

Severity
7.4 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
9.1 (Critical)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/fabedge/fabedge"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "0.8.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-36536"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-08-02T13:23:35Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-07-24T19:15:04Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Insecure permissions in fabedge v0.8.1 allows attackers to access sensitive data and escalate privileges by obtaining the service account\u0027s token.",
  "id": "GHSA-c9cm-5j82-m6pj",
  "modified": "2024-11-18T16:26:55Z",
  "published": "2024-07-24T21:31:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-36536"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://gist.github.com/HouqiyuA/381f100f2ba82a8ada03994aac5bb2e8"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/fabedge/fabedge"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2024-3027"
    }
  ],
  "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"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "fabedge has insecure permissions"
}

GHSA-C9CM-RVWW-38HX

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-12-23 15:30 – Updated: 2023-01-04 18:30
VLAI
Details

An improper access validation vulnerability exists in airMAX AC <8.7.11, airFiber 60/LR <2.6.2, airFiber 60 XG/HD <v1.0.0 and airFiber GBE <1.4.1 that allows a malicious actor to retrieve status and usage data from the UISP device.

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-44565"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284",
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-12-23T15:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "An improper access validation vulnerability exists in airMAX AC \u003c8.7.11, airFiber 60/LR \u003c2.6.2, airFiber 60 XG/HD \u003cv1.0.0 and airFiber GBE \u003c1.4.1 that allows a malicious actor to retrieve status and usage data from the UISP device.",
  "id": "GHSA-c9cm-rvww-38hx",
  "modified": "2023-01-04T18:30:59Z",
  "published": "2022-12-23T15:30:24Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-44565"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://community.ui.com/releases/Security-Advisory-Bulletin-027-027/123e4577-9f00-4777-abe1-64a1d56fee05"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}
Mitigation
Architecture and Design
  • 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
Architecture and Design

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
Architecture and Design

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
Architecture and Design
  • 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
System Configuration Installation

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.

No CAPEC attack patterns related to this CWE.

← Back to the CWE list