Goal Reached Thanks to every supporter — we hit 100%!

Goal: 1000 CNY · Raised: 1359 CNY

100%

CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当) — Vulnerability Class 1306

1306 vulnerabilities classified as CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当). AI Chinese analysis included.

CWE-285 represents a critical access control weakness where an application fails to verify whether a user possesses the necessary permissions to access a specific resource or execute a particular action. Attackers typically exploit this vulnerability by manipulating request parameters, such as changing user IDs in URLs or API calls, to bypass security checks and access data belonging to other users or perform administrative tasks. This often leads to severe data breaches or unauthorized system modifications. To prevent such flaws, developers must implement robust, centralized authorization mechanisms that consistently validate user privileges for every sensitive operation. Relying solely on client-side checks is insufficient; instead, server-side enforcement using role-based or attribute-based access control ensures that only authenticated and authorized entities can interact with protected resources, thereby maintaining strict integrity and confidentiality.

MITRE CWE Description
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Common Consequences (3)
Confidentiality Read Application Data, Read 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 data.
Integrity Modify Application Data, Modify 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 or Assume Identity, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
When access control checks are not applied consistently - or not at all - an attacker could gain privileges and execute unauthorized code or commands by modifying or reading critical data directly, or by accessing insufficiently-protected, privileged functionality.
Mitigations (5)
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) 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…
Architecture and Design 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].
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 …
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.
Examples (2)
This function runs an arbitrary SQL query on a given database, returning the result of the query.
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']);
Bad · PHP
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 $id argument is numeric, constructs a filename based on that id, and reads the message details from that file. Also ass…
sub DisplayPrivateMessage { my($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);
Bad · Perl
CVE ID Title CVSS Severity Published
CVE-2026-95754 MISP: Disabled-user check ineffective in pre-authentication TOTP login branch — MISP 6.9 Medium 2026-09-22
CVE-2026-25254 Improper authorization in Qualcomm Software Center — Snapdragon 9.8 Critical 2026-09-22
CVE-2026-79917 MaxKB: Chat share-link endpoint missing owner check: a chat token can publish another user's conversation — MaxKB 6.5 Medium 2026-09-21
CVE-2026-63330 Warpgate: Missing Admin Authorization on Live Recording Stream WebSocket Allows Any Authenticated User to Eavesdrop on Terminal Sessions — warpgate 7.7 High 2026-09-21
CVE-2026-93961 Dromara UJCMS UserController UserController.java usernameExist improper authorization — UJCMS 5.3 Medium 2026-09-20
CVE-2026-84241 IBM Guardium Data Protection is affected by multiple vulnerabilities. — Guardium Data Protection 8.1 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-84076 IBM Guardium Data Protection is affected by multiple vulnerabilities. — Guardium Data Protection 7.6 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-84036 IBM Guardium Data Protection is affected by multiple vulnerabilities. — Guardium Data Protection 7.4 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-61833 zot: Bearer authentication maps DELETE to push scope, allowing unauthorized deletion — zot 8.1 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-77239 WACRM: Service-role routes missing a role check — wacrm 8.1 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-10030 IBM MQ Console is vulnerable to privilege escalation — MQ 7.1 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-67102 HCL BigFix Service Management is affected by multiple security vulnerabilities. — HCL BigFix Service Management 8.1 High 2026-09-18
CVE-2026-85878 Azure Database for PostgreSQL Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability — Azure HorizonDB 9.9 Critical 2026-09-17
CVE-2026-54551 WireGuard Portal: Authenticated WebSocket /api/v0/ws broadcasts all peers' and interfaces' traffic stats to every user (missing per-user authorization) — wg-portal 4.3 Medium 2026-09-17
CVE-2026-20285 Cisco Identity Services Engine Authorization Bypass Vulnerability — Cisco Identity Services Engine Software 4.3 Medium 2026-09-16
CVE-2026-20286 Cisco Identity Services Engine Authorization Bypass Vulnerability — Cisco Identity Services Engine Software 4.3 Medium 2026-09-16
CVE-2026-76420 Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Software Impersonated sftunnel Connection Vulnerability — Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center (FMC) 9.0 Critical 2026-09-16
CVE-2026-92087 @fastify/auth vulnerable to Authorization Bypass via order-dependent evaluation of composed auth — @fastify/auth 8.1 High 2026-09-16
CVE-2026-11934 Security vulnerabilities have been addressed in IBM Verify Identity Access and IBM Security Verify Access — Verify Identity Access - - 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-55775 OpenBao's System Backend allows Unauthorized Management of the containing Namespace — openbao 2.3 Low 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-49446 Cosmos: Authentication bypass via forward-auth header smuggling on Constellation tunnel in Cosmos-Server — Cosmos-Server 6.1 Medium 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-52822 Kimai: Improper Authorization in Kimai Timesheet Restart and Duplicate Allows New Timesheets After Project Access Revocation — kimai 5.3 Medium 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-52826 Kimai: Improper Authorization in Kimai Project, Customer, and Activity Rate Edit Endpoints Allows Cross-Scope Rate Manipulation — kimai 5.3 Medium 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-52825 Kimai: Improper Authorization in Kimai Team Member and Team Activity Assignment APIs Allows Expansion of Team Scope Beyond Authorized Visibility — kimai 5.3 Medium 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-48717 OpenAM OAuth Authorization Bypass via PKCE Challenge — OpenAM 9.1 Critical 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-45052 OpenAM Pre-auth User Profile Tampering via Anonymous SOAP Authn in Liberty IDPP/Discovery Endpoints — OpenAM 9.3 Critical 2026-09-15
CVE-2026-75792 IBM Sterling Secure Proxy is vulnerable to multiple issues — Sterling Secure Proxy 4.3 Medium 2026-09-14
CVE-2026-90810 cosmicstack-labs mercury-agent Shell Command Permission Check permissions.ts PermissionManager.checkShellCommand improper authorization — mercury-agent 6.3 Medium 2026-09-14
CVE-2026-55236 langgraph-api: Incomplete assistant authorization in LangGraph Server run creation — langgraph-api 5.9 Medium 2026-09-14
CVE-2026-90935 Froxlor before 2.3.7 Authorization Bypass via Mysqls.add API — froxlor 4.3 Medium 2026-09-14

Vulnerabilities classified as CWE-285 (授权机制不恰当) represent 1306 CVEs. The CWE taxonomy describes the weakness; review individual CVEs for product-specific impact.