Description
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Potential Impact
Confidentiality
Read Application Data, Read Files or Directories
Integrity
Modify Application Data, Modify Files or Directories
Access Control
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Demonstrative Examples
function runEmployeeQuery($dbName, $name){mysql_select_db($dbName,$globalDbHandle) or die("Could not open Database".$dbName);
//Use a prepared statement to avoid CWE-89
$preparedStatement = $globalDbHandle->prepare('SELECT * FROM employees WHERE name = :name');$preparedStatement->execute(array(':name' => $name));return $preparedStatement->fetchAll();}
/.../
$employeeRecord = runEmployeeQuery('EmployeeDB',$_GET['EmployeeName']);sub DisplayPrivateMessage {my($id) = @_;my $Message = LookupMessageObject($id);print "From: " . encodeHTML($Message->{from}) . "<br>\n";print "Subject: " . encodeHTML($Message->{subject}) . "\n";print "<hr>\n";print "Body: " . encodeHTML($Message->{body}) . "\n";}
my $q = new CGI;
# For purposes of this example, assume that CWE-309 and
# CWE-523 do not apply.
if (! AuthenticateUser($q->param('username'), $q->param('password'))) {ExitError("invalid username or password");}
my $id = $q->param('id');DisplayPrivateMessage($id);Mitigations & Prevention
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) 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.
Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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.
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].
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 wit
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.
Detection Methods
- Automated Static Analysis Limited — 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
- 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 Moderate — 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 eval
- Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode SOAR Partial — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
- Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation SOAR Partial — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
- Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation SOAR Partial — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Real-World CVE Examples
| CVE ID | Description |
|---|---|
| CVE-2024-6845 | chatbot Wordpress plugin does not perform authorization on a REST endpoint, allowing retrieval of an API key |
| CVE-2022-24730 | Go-based continuous deployment product does not check that a user has certain privileges to update or create an app, allowing adversaries to read sensitive repository information |
| CVE-2009-3168 | Web application does not restrict access to admin scripts, allowing authenticated users to reset administrative passwords. |
| CVE-2009-2960 | Web application does not restrict access to admin scripts, allowing authenticated users to modify passwords of other users. |
| CVE-2009-3597 | Web application stores database file under the web root with insufficient access control (CWE-219), allowing direct request. |
| CVE-2009-2282 | Terminal server does not check authorization for guest access. |
| CVE-2009-3230 | Database server does not use appropriate privileges for certain sensitive operations. |
| CVE-2009-2213 | Gateway uses default "Allow" configuration for its authorization settings. |
| CVE-2009-0034 | Chain: product does not properly interpret a configuration option for a system group, allowing users to gain privileges. |
| CVE-2008-6123 | Chain: SNMP product does not properly parse a configuration option for which hosts are allowed to connect, allowing unauthorized IP addresses to connect. |
| CVE-2008-5027 | System monitoring software allows users to bypass authorization by creating custom forms. |
| CVE-2008-7109 | Chain: reliance on client-side security (CWE-602) allows attackers to bypass authorization using a custom client. |
| CVE-2008-3424 | Chain: product does not properly handle wildcards in an authorization policy list, allowing unintended access. |
| CVE-2009-3781 | Content management system does not check access permissions for private files, allowing others to view those files. |
| CVE-2008-4577 | ACL-based protection mechanism treats negative access rights as if they are positive, allowing bypass of intended restrictions. |
Showing 15 of 21 observed examples.
Related Weaknesses
Taxonomy Mappings
- 7 Pernicious Kingdoms: — Missing Access Control
- OWASP Top Ten 2007: A10 — Failure to Restrict URL Access
- OWASP Top Ten 2004: A2 — Broken Access Control
- Software Fault Patterns: SFP35 — Insecure resource access
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CWE-285?
CWE-285 (Improper Authorization) is a software weakness identified by MITRE's Common Weakness Enumeration. It is classified as a Class-level weakness. The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How can CWE-285 be exploited?
Attackers can exploit CWE-285 (Improper Authorization) to read application data, read files or directories. This weakness is typically introduced during the Implementation, Architecture and Design, Operation phase of software development.
How do I prevent CWE-285?
Key mitigations include: 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)
What is the severity of CWE-285?
CWE-285 is classified as a Class-level weakness (High abstraction). It has been observed in 21 real-world CVEs.