|ID: 285||Date: (C)2012-05-14 (M)2018-10-10|
|Type: weakness||Status: DRAFT|
|Abstraction Type: Class|
The software does not perform or incorrectly performs an
authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an
Extended DescriptionAssuming 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.When access control checks are not applied consistently - or not at all -
users are able to access data or perform actions that they should not be
allowed to perform. This can lead to a wide range of problems, including
information exposures, denial of service, and arbitrary code
Likelihood of Exploit: High
Applicable PlatformsLanguage Class: Language-independentTechnology Class: Web-ServerTechnology Class: OftenTechnology Class: Database-ServerTechnology Class: Often
Time Of Introduction
- Architecture and Design
Related Attack Patterns
|Confidentiality ||Read application
dataRead files or
directories ||An attacker could read sensitive data, either by reading the data
directly from a data store that is not properly restricted, or by
accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality to read the
|Integrity ||Modify application
dataModify files or
directories ||An attacker could modify sensitive data, either by writing the data
directly to a data store that is not properly restricted, or by
accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality to write
the data. |
|Access_Control ||Gain privileges / assume
identity ||An attacker could gain privileges by modifying or reading critical
data directly, or by accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged
|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. ||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. ||Moderate || |
|Architecture and Design || ||Divide the software 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. || || |
|Architecture and Design || ||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. || || |
|Architecture and Design ||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 [R.285.5] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control
feature [R.285.4]. || || |
|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. || || |
|System ConfigurationInstallation || ||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. || || |
|CWE-285 ChildOf CWE-899 ||Category ||CWE-888 || |
Demonstrative Examples (Details)
- The following program could be part of a bulletin board system that
allows users to send private messages to each other. This program intends to
authenticate the user before deciding whether a private message should be
displayed. Assume that LookupMessageObject() ensures that the $id argument
is numeric, constructs a filename based on that id, and reads the message
details from that file. Also assume that the program stores all private
messages for all users in the same directory. (Demonstrative Example Id DX-96)
- This function runs an arbitrary SQL query on a given database,
returning the result of the query. (Demonstrative Example Id DX-95)
- 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.
- CVE-2008-6548 : Product does not check the ACL of a page accessed using an "include" directive, allowing attackers to read unauthorized files.
- CVE-2007-2925 : Default ACL list for a DNS server does not set certain ACLs, allowing unauthorized DNS queries.
- CVE-2006-6679 : Product relies on the X-Forwarded-For HTTP header for authorization, allowing unintended access by spoofing the header.
- CVE-2005-3623 : OS kernel does not check for a certain privilege before setting ACLs for files.
- CVE-2005-2801 : Chain: file-system code performs an incorrect comparison (CWE-697), preventing default ACLs from being properly applied.
- CVE-2001-1155 : Chain: product does not properly check the result of a reverse DNS lookup because of operator precedence (CWE-783), allowing bypass of DNS-based access restrictions.
For more examples, refer to CVE relations in the bottom box.
White Box Definitions None
Black Box Definitions None
|7 Pernicious Kingdoms || ||Missing Access Control || |
|OWASP Top Ten 2007 ||A10 ||Failure to Restrict URL Access ||CWE_More_Specific |
|OWASP Top Ten 2004 ||A2 ||Broken Access Control ||CWE_More_Specific |
- NIST .Role Based Access Control and Role Based
- M. Howard D. LeBlanc .Writing Secure Code 2nd Edition. Microsoft. Section:'Chapter 4, "Authorization" Page 114; Chapter 6, "Determining
Appropriate Access Control" Page 171'. Published on 2002.
- Frank Kim .Top 25 Series - Rank 5 - Improper Access Control
(Authorization). SANS Software Security Institute. 2010-03-04.
- OWASP .OWASP Enterprise Security API (ESAPI) Project.
- Rahul Bhattacharjee .Authentication using JAAS.
- Mark Dowd John McDonald Justin Schuh .The Art of Software Security Assessment 1st Edition. Addison Wesley. Section:'Chapter 2, "Common Vulnerabilities of Authorization", Page
39.'. Published on 2006.
- Mark Dowd John McDonald Justin Schuh .The Art of Software Security Assessment 1st Edition. Addison Wesley. Section:'Chapter 11, "ACL Inheritance", Page 649.'. Published on 2006.