CWE-420
Alerte pour un CWE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CWE.
Unprotected Alternate Channel
The product protects a primary channel, but it does not use the same level of protection for an alternate channel.
Informations
Modes Of Introduction
Architecture and Design : OMISSION: This weakness is caused by missing a security tactic during the architecture and design phase.Implementation
Operation
Applicable Platforms
Language
Class: Not Language-Specific (Undetermined)Common Consequences
| Scope | Impact | Likelihood |
|---|---|---|
| Access Control | Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Bypass Protection Mechanism |
Observed Examples
| Reference | Description |
|---|---|
| When the internal flash is protected by blocking access on the Data Bus (DBUS), it can still be indirectly accessed through the Instruction Bus (IBUS). | |
| DB server assumes that local clients have performed authentication, allowing attacker to directly connect to a process to load libraries and execute commands; a socket interface also exists (another alternate channel), so attack can be remote. | |
| Product does not restrict access to underlying database, so attacker can bypass restrictions by directly querying the database. | |
| User can avoid lockouts by using an API instead of the GUI to conduct brute force password guessing. | |
| FTP service can not be disabled even when other access controls would require it. | |
| Windows named pipe created without authentication/access control, allowing configuration modification. | |
| Router management interface spawns a separate TCP connection after authentication, allowing hijacking by attacker coming from the same IP address. |
Potential Mitigations
Phases : Architecture and DesignIdentify all alternate channels and use the same protection mechanisms that are used for the primary channels.
Vulnerability Mapping Notes
Rationale : This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.Comments : Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.
Notes
This can be primary to authentication errors, and resultant from unhandled error conditions.Submission
| Name | Organization | Date | Date Release | Version |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PLOVER | Draft 3 |
Modifications
| Name | Organization | Date | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eric Dalci | Cigital | updated Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships, Relationship_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Common_Consequences | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Potential_Mitigations | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Applicable_Platforms, Potential_Mitigations, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Modes_of_Introduction, Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Relationships | |
| CWE Content Team | MITRE | updated Description | |
| 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 Demonstrative_Examples |
2024©
tesweb SA
