CWE-284
Alerte pour un CWE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CWE.
Improper Access Control
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
Extended Description
Access control involves the use of several protection mechanisms such as:
- Authentication (proving the identity of an actor)
- Authorization (ensuring that a given actor can access a resource), and
- Accountability (tracking of activities that were performed)
When any mechanism is not applied or otherwise fails, attackers can compromise the security of the product by gaining privileges, reading sensitive information, executing commands, evading detection, etc.
There are two distinct behaviors that can introduce access control weaknesses:
- Specification: incorrect privileges, permissions, ownership, etc. are explicitly specified for either the user or the resource (for example, setting a password file to be world-writable, or giving administrator capabilities to a guest user). This action could be performed by the program or the administrator.
- Enforcement: the mechanism contains errors that prevent it from properly enforcing the specified access control requirements (e.g., allowing the user to specify their own privileges, or allowing a syntactically-incorrect ACL to produce insecure settings). This problem occurs within the program itself, in that it does not actually enforce the intended security policy that the administrator specifies.
Informations
Modes Of Introduction
Architecture and DesignImplementation : REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.
Operation
Applicable Platforms
Technologies
Class: Not Technology-Specific (Undetermined)Class: ICS/OT (Undetermined)
Common Consequences
| Scope | Impact | Likelihood |
|---|---|---|
| Other | Varies by Context |
Observed Examples
| Reference | Description |
|---|---|
| A form hosting website only checks the session authentication status for a single form, making it possible to bypass authentication when there are multiple forms | |
| Access-control setting in web-based document collaboration tool is not properly implemented by the code, which prevents listing hidden directories but does not prevent direct requests to files in those directories. | |
| Python-based HTTP library did not scope cookies to a particular domain such that "supercookies" could be sent to any domain on redirect | |
| Chain: Cloud computing virtualization platform does not require authentication for upload of a tar format file (CWE-306), then uses .. path traversal sequences (CWE-23) in the file to access unexpected files, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. | |
| IT management product does not perform authentication for some REST API requests, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. | |
| Firmware for a WiFi router uses a hard-coded password for a BusyBox shell, allowing bypass of authentication through the UART port | |
| Bluetooth speaker does not require authentication for the debug functionality on the UART port, allowing root shell access | |
| Default setting in workflow management product allows all API requests without authentication, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. | |
| Bulletin board applies restrictions on number of images during post creation, but does not enforce this on editing. |
Potential Mitigations
Phases : Architecture and Design // OperationVery carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Phases : Architecture and Design
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
Vulnerability Mapping Notes
Rationale : CWE-284 is extremely high-level, a Pillar. Its name, "Improper Access Control," is often misused in low-information vulnerability reports [REF-1287] or by active use of the OWASP Top Ten, such as "A01:2021-Broken Access Control". It is not useful for trend analysis.Comments : Consider using descendants of CWE-284 that are more specific to the kind of access control involved, such as those involving authorization (Missing Authorization (CWE-862), Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863), Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource (CWE-732), etc.); authentication (Missing Authentication (CWE-306) or Weak Authentication (CWE-1390)); Incorrect User Management (CWE-286); Improper Restriction of Communication Channel to Intended Endpoints (CWE-923); etc.
Related Attack Patterns
| CAPEC-ID | Attack Pattern Name |
|---|---|
| CAPEC-19 | Embedding Scripts within Scripts An adversary leverages the capability to execute their own script by embedding it within other scripts that the target software is likely to execute due to programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute scripts. |
| CAPEC-441 | Malicious Logic Insertion An adversary installs or adds malicious logic (also known as malware) into a seemingly benign component of a fielded system. This logic is often hidden from the user of the system and works behind the scenes to achieve negative impacts. With the proliferation of mass digital storage and inexpensive multimedia devices, Bluetooth and 802.11 support, new attack vectors for spreading malware are emerging for things we once thought of as innocuous greeting cards, picture frames, or digital projectors. This pattern of attack focuses on systems already fielded and used in operation as opposed to systems and their components that are still under development and part of the supply chain. |
| CAPEC-478 | Modification of Windows Service Configuration An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to modify the execution parameters of a Windows service. The goal of this attack is to execute a malicious binary in place of an existing service. |
| CAPEC-479 | Malicious Root Certificate An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization and installs a new root certificate on a compromised system. Certificates are commonly used for establishing secure TLS/SSL communications within a web browser. When a user attempts to browse a website that presents a certificate that is not trusted an error message will be displayed to warn the user of the security risk. Depending on the security settings, the browser may not allow the user to establish a connection to the website. Adversaries have used this technique to avoid security warnings prompting users when compromised systems connect over HTTPS to adversary controlled web servers that spoof legitimate websites in order to collect login credentials. |
| CAPEC-502 | Intent Spoof An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, issues an intent directed toward a specific trusted application's component in an attempt to achieve a variety of different objectives including modification of data, information disclosure, and data injection. Components that have been unintentionally exported and made public are subject to this type of an attack. If the component trusts the intent's action without verififcation, then the target application performs the functionality at the adversary's request, helping the adversary achieve the desired negative technical impact. |
| CAPEC-503 | WebView Exposure An adversary, through a malicious web page, accesses application specific functionality by leveraging interfaces registered through WebView's addJavascriptInterface API. Once an interface is registered to WebView through addJavascriptInterface, it becomes global and all pages loaded in the WebView can call this interface. |
| CAPEC-536 | Data Injected During Configuration An attacker with access to data files and processes on a victim's system injects malicious data into critical operational data during configuration or recalibration, causing the victim's system to perform in a suboptimal manner that benefits the adversary. |
| CAPEC-546 | Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant Environment An adversary obtains unauthorized information due to insecure or incomplete data deletion in a multi-tenant environment. If a cloud provider fails to completely delete storage and data from former cloud tenants' systems/resources, once these resources are allocated to new, potentially malicious tenants, the latter can probe the provided resources for sensitive information still there. |
| CAPEC-550 | Install New Service When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Adversaries may install a new service which will be executed at startup (on a Windows system, by modifying the registry). The service name may be disguised by using a name from a related operating system or benign software. Services are usually run with elevated privileges. |
| CAPEC-551 | Modify Existing Service When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Modifying existing services may break existing services or may enable services that are disabled/not commonly used. |
| CAPEC-552 | Install Rootkit An adversary exploits a weakness in authentication to install malware that alters the functionality and information provide by targeted operating system API calls. Often referred to as rootkits, it is often used to hide the presence of programs, files, network connections, services, drivers, and other system components. |
| CAPEC-556 | Replace File Extension Handlers When a file is opened, its file handler is checked to determine which program opens the file. File handlers are configuration properties of many operating systems. Applications can modify the file handler for a given file extension to call an arbitrary program when a file with the given extension is opened. |
| CAPEC-558 | Replace Trusted Executable An adversary exploits weaknesses in privilege management or access control to replace a trusted executable with a malicious version and enable the execution of malware when that trusted executable is called. |
| CAPEC-562 | Modify Shared File An adversary manipulates the files in a shared location by adding malicious programs, scripts, or exploit code to valid content. Once a user opens the shared content, the tainted content is executed. |
| CAPEC-563 | Add Malicious File to Shared Webroot An adversaries may add malicious content to a website through the open file share and then browse to that content with a web browser to cause the server to execute the content. The malicious content will typically run under the context and permissions of the web server process, often resulting in local system or administrative privileges depending on how the web server is configured. |
| CAPEC-564 | Run Software at Logon Operating system allows logon scripts to be run whenever a specific user or users logon to a system. If adversaries can access these scripts, they may insert additional code into the logon script. This code can allow them to maintain persistence or move laterally within an enclave because it is executed every time the affected user or users logon to a computer. Modifying logon scripts can effectively bypass workstation and enclave firewalls. Depending on the access configuration of the logon scripts, either local credentials or a remote administrative account may be necessary. |
| CAPEC-578 | Disable Security Software An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to disable security tools so that detection does not occur. This can take the form of killing processes, deleting registry keys so that tools do not start at run time, deleting log files, or other methods. |
Notes
This entry needs more work. Possible sub-categories include:
- Trusted group includes undesired entities (partially covered by CWE-286)
- Group can perform undesired actions
- ACL parse error does not fail closed
References
REF-7
Writing Secure CodeMichael Howard, David LeBlanc.
https://www.microsoftpressstore.com/store/writing-secure-code-9780735617223
REF-44
24 Deadly Sins of Software SecurityMichael Howard, David LeBlanc, John Viega.
REF-1287
Supplemental Details - 2022 CWE Top 25MITRE.
https://cwe.mitre.org/top25/archive/2022/2022_cwe_top25_supplemental.html#problematicMappingDetails
Submission
| Name | Organization | Date | Date Release | Version |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PLOVER | Draft 3 |
Modifications
| Name | Organization | Date | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eric Dalci | Cigital | updated Time_of_Introduction | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Alternate_Terms, Background_Details, Description, Maintenance_Notes, Name, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Alternate_Terms, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References, Taxonomy_Mappings | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | Changed name and description; clarified difference between "access control" and "authorization." | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Alternate_Terms, Background_Details, Description, Maintenance_Notes, Name, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Affected_Resources, Modes_of_Introduction, Observed_Examples, References, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Related_Attack_Patterns | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings, Type | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Maintenance_Notes, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated References | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Applicable_Platforms, Description, Observed_Examples, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Mapping_Notes | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Observed_Examples |
2024©
tesweb SA
