Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-285

Discouraged

Improper Authorization

Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

2760 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-CWC2-3F9G-PHM3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-20 12:32 – Updated: 2025-03-20 12:32
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability in infiniflow/ragflow version RAGFlow-0.13.0 allows for partial account takeover via insecure data querying. The issue arises from the way tenant IDs are handled in the application. If a user has access to multiple tenants, they can manipulate their tenant access to query and access API tokens of other tenants. This vulnerability affects the following endpoints: /v1/system/token_list, /v1/system/new_token, /v1/api/token_list, /v1/api/new_token, and /v1/api/rm. An attacker can exploit this to access other tenants' API tokens, perform actions on behalf of other tenants, and access their data.

Severity
8.1 (High)
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-12880"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285",
      "CWE-639"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-03-20T10:15:31Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability in infiniflow/ragflow version RAGFlow-0.13.0 allows for partial account takeover via insecure data querying. The issue arises from the way tenant IDs are handled in the application. If a user has access to multiple tenants, they can manipulate their tenant access to query and access API tokens of other tenants. This vulnerability affects the following endpoints: /v1/system/token_list, /v1/system/new_token, /v1/api/token_list, /v1/api/new_token, and /v1/api/rm. An attacker can exploit this to access other tenants\u0027 API tokens, perform actions on behalf of other tenants, and access their data.",
  "id": "GHSA-cwc2-3f9g-phm3",
  "modified": "2025-03-20T12:32:44Z",
  "published": "2025-03-20T12:32:44Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-12880"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/c41c7eaa-554a-408c-96be-9dba56113970"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CWCC-8WQW-36GF

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-27 15:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 07:51
VLAI
Details

A flaw was found in APICast, when 3Scale's OIDC module does not properly evaluate the response to a mismatched token from a separate realm. This could allow a separate realm to be accessible to an attacker, permitting access to unauthorized information.

Severity
7.4 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-0456"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285",
      "CWE-862"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-09-27T15:16:03Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A flaw was found in APICast, when 3Scale\u0027s OIDC module does not properly evaluate the response to a mismatched token from a separate realm. This could allow a separate realm to be accessible to an attacker, permitting access to unauthorized information.",
  "id": "GHSA-cwcc-8wqw-36gf",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T07:51:14Z",
  "published": "2023-09-27T15:30:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-0456"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-0456"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2163586"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CWFQ-MG38-GXV3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-03 12:30 – Updated: 2024-06-03 12:30
VLAI
Details

An improper authorization in Fortinet FortiWebManager version 7.2.0 and 7.0.0 through 7.0.4 and 6.3.0 and 6.2.3 through 6.2.4 and 6.0.2 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via HTTP requests or CLI.

Severity
7.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-23667"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-06-03T10:15:13Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "An improper authorization in Fortinet FortiWebManager version 7.2.0 and 7.0.0 through 7.0.4 and 6.3.0 and 6.2.3 through 6.2.4 and 6.0.2 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via HTTP requests or CLI.",
  "id": "GHSA-cwfq-mg38-gxv3",
  "modified": "2024-06-03T12:30:38Z",
  "published": "2024-06-03T12:30:38Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23667"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-23-222"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CX95-Q6GX-W4QP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-15 14:04 – Updated: 2024-10-15 19:56
VLAI
Summary
SAK-50571 Sakai Kernel users created with type roleview can login as a normal user
Details

Impact

Illegal access can be granted to the system.

References

see https://sakaiproject.atlassian.net/browse/SAK-50571

Severity
0.0 (None)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:N
8.7 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.sakaiproject.kernel:sakai-kernel-impl"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "23.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "23.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-47876"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-10-15T14:04:27Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-10-15T16:15:05Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\nIllegal access can be granted to the system.\n\n### References\nsee https://sakaiproject.atlassian.net/browse/SAK-50571",
  "id": "GHSA-cx95-q6gx-w4qp",
  "modified": "2024-10-15T19:56:17Z",
  "published": "2024-10-15T14:04:27Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/sakaiproject/sakai/security/advisories/GHSA-cx95-q6gx-w4qp"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47876"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/sakaiproject/sakai/commit/a9aadd9347cfb204515e89ac0163e1be9e56cc41"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.sakaiproject.kernel/sakai-kernel-impl"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/sakaiproject/sakai"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://sakaiproject.atlassian.net/browse/SAK-50571"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "SAK-50571 Sakai Kernel users created with type roleview can login as a normal user"
}

GHSA-F24M-JWF4-XPXC

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-12 00:31 – Updated: 2026-05-27 00:31
VLAI
Details

An authorization issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.4, macOS Sonoma 14.8.4. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.

Severity
5.5 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-43403"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-02-11T23:16:01Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "An authorization issue was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.4, macOS Sonoma 14.8.4. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.",
  "id": "GHSA-f24m-jwf4-xpxc",
  "modified": "2026-05-27T00:31:26Z",
  "published": "2026-02-12T00:31:03Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-43403"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/125110"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126349"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/126350"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-F27P-PW2P-9PR4

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-28 16:37 – Updated: 2026-08-28 16:37
VLAI
Summary
Vikunja has a project duplication bypasses write-permission check on the target parent project
Details

Summary

The project-duplication endpoint fails to enforce write access to the target parent project. Any authenticated (non-link-share) user can duplicate a project they can read into any parent project on the instance, regardless of whether they have write access to that parent — injecting an attacker-owned project into another user's or team's project hierarchy.

Details

ProjectDuplicate.CanCreate (pkg/models/project_duplicate.go) is meant to require write access to the parent the duplicate is placed under — its own comment says "Parent project exists + user has write access". The implementation does neither correctly:

func (pd *ProjectDuplicate) CanCreate(s *xorm.Session, a web.Auth) (canCreate bool, err error) {
    pd.Project = &Project{ID: pd.ProjectID}
    canRead, _, err := pd.Project.CanRead(s, a)
    if err != nil || !canRead {
        return canRead, err
    }
    if pd.ParentProjectID == 0 {
        return canRead, err
    }
    // Parent project exists + user has write access to is (-> can create new projects)
    parent := &Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID}
    return parent.CanCreate(s, a)   // <-- bug
}

Two defects compound here:

  1. Wrong permission method. It calls parent.CanCreate ("may I create this project?") instead of parent.CanWrite ("may I create children inside this project?"). The latter is what the normal create path uses — POST /projects with a parent_project_id enforces parent.CanWrite via Project.CanCreate (pkg/models/project_permissions.go:196-199).

  2. Unhydrated struct. parent is constructed as &Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID} and never loaded from the database, so its in-memory ParentProjectID is always 0. Inside Project.CanCreate the only branch that performs any permission check is if p.ParentProjectID != 0 { return parent.CanWrite(...) } — which therefore never executes. Control falls through to the link-share check and then return true, nil. The result is true for any authenticated non-link-share user, for any ParentProjectID.

Nothing downstream re-checks: ProjectDuplicate.Create → CreateProject → checkProjectBeforeUpdateOrDelete (pkg/models/project.go:954) validates only that the parent exists, is not a pseudo-project, and introduces no cycle — no authorization.

Impact

An authenticated user can:

  • Duplicate any project they can read (including their own) and attach the copy as a child of any parent project ID on the instance, with no write access to that parent.
  • Inject an attacker-owned project into other users'/teams' project trees. The duplicate is owned by the attacker but appears inside the victim's hierarchy; members of the victim parent see it, and because Vikunja propagates parent access down the tree, they may inherit access to the injected project — enabling content injection / spam / phishing inside another tenant's workspace.

This is a bypass of the same parent-write guard that the ordinary create path enforces, so the duplicate route is an authorization hole for an operation that is otherwise correctly gated. The endpoint requires authentication; it does not expose or modify the victim's existing project data (the source is attacker-readable), so the impact is an integrity / access-control violation rather than confidentiality.

Proof of Concept

  1. As user A, create or have read access to any project S (e.g. id 100).
  2. Identify a parent project P (e.g. id 5) owned by user B, to which A has no access.
  3. Call PUT /api/v1/projects/100/duplicate with body {"parent_project_id": 5}.
  4. The request succeeds (201). A new project owned by A is created as a child of B's project 5, despite A having no write access to it. The equivalent POST /api/v1/projects with parent_project_id: 5 would be correctly rejected with 403.

Affected versions

Introduced with the namespace→project migration (commit fef253312, first released in v0.21.0) and present through the latest release (v2.3.0). The shared model also backs the new /api/v2 duplication route under review, so any v2 release would inherit the same flaw unless fixed in the model.

Recommended Fix

In ProjectDuplicate.CanCreate, check write access to the parent directly:

parent := &Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID}
return parent.CanWrite(s, a)

Project.CanWrite loads the project from the database and evaluates real permissions, fixing both the wrong-method and the unhydrated-struct defects at once and matching the documented contract. (It also rejects archived parents, which is desirable.)

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.3.0"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "code.vikunja.io/api"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.21.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-54766"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285",
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-28T16:37:26Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nThe project-duplication endpoint fails to enforce write access to the target parent project. Any authenticated (non-link-share) user can duplicate a project they can read into **any** parent project on the instance, regardless of whether they have write access to that parent \u2014 injecting an attacker-owned project into another user\u0027s or team\u0027s project hierarchy.\n\n## Details\n\n`ProjectDuplicate.CanCreate` (`pkg/models/project_duplicate.go`) is meant to require write access to the parent the duplicate is placed under \u2014 its own comment says \"Parent project exists + user has write access\". The implementation does neither correctly:\n\n```go\nfunc (pd *ProjectDuplicate) CanCreate(s *xorm.Session, a web.Auth) (canCreate bool, err error) {\n    pd.Project = \u0026Project{ID: pd.ProjectID}\n    canRead, _, err := pd.Project.CanRead(s, a)\n    if err != nil || !canRead {\n        return canRead, err\n    }\n    if pd.ParentProjectID == 0 {\n        return canRead, err\n    }\n    // Parent project exists + user has write access to is (-\u003e can create new projects)\n    parent := \u0026Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID}\n    return parent.CanCreate(s, a)   // \u003c-- bug\n}\n```\n\nTwo defects compound here:\n\n1. **Wrong permission method.** It calls `parent.CanCreate` (\"may I create *this* project?\") instead of `parent.CanWrite` (\"may I create children *inside* this project?\"). The latter is what the normal create path uses \u2014 `POST /projects` with a `parent_project_id` enforces `parent.CanWrite` via `Project.CanCreate` (`pkg/models/project_permissions.go:196-199`).\n\n2. **Unhydrated struct.** `parent` is constructed as `\u0026Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID}` and never loaded from the database, so its in-memory `ParentProjectID` is always `0`. Inside `Project.CanCreate` the only branch that performs any permission check is `if p.ParentProjectID != 0 { return parent.CanWrite(...) }` \u2014 which therefore never executes. Control falls through to the link-share check and then `return true, nil`. The result is `true` for any authenticated non-link-share user, for any `ParentProjectID`.\n\nNothing downstream re-checks: `ProjectDuplicate.Create` \u2192 `CreateProject` \u2192 `checkProjectBeforeUpdateOrDelete` (`pkg/models/project.go:954`) validates only that the parent exists, is not a pseudo-project, and introduces no cycle \u2014 no authorization.\n\n## Impact\n\nAn authenticated user can:\n\n- Duplicate any project they can read (including their own) and attach the copy as a child of **any** parent project ID on the instance, with no write access to that parent.\n- Inject an attacker-owned project into other users\u0027/teams\u0027 project trees. The duplicate is owned by the attacker but appears inside the victim\u0027s hierarchy; members of the victim parent see it, and because Vikunja propagates parent access down the tree, they may inherit access to the injected project \u2014 enabling content injection / spam / phishing inside another tenant\u0027s workspace.\n\nThis is a bypass of the same parent-write guard that the ordinary create path enforces, so the duplicate route is an authorization hole for an operation that is otherwise correctly gated. The endpoint requires authentication; it does not expose or modify the victim\u0027s existing project data (the source is attacker-readable), so the impact is an integrity / access-control violation rather than confidentiality.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\n1. As user A, create or have read access to any project `S` (e.g. id 100).\n2. Identify a parent project `P` (e.g. id 5) owned by user B, to which A has **no** access.\n3. Call `PUT /api/v1/projects/100/duplicate` with body `{\"parent_project_id\": 5}`.\n4. The request succeeds (201). A new project owned by A is created as a child of B\u0027s project 5, despite A having no write access to it. The equivalent `POST /api/v1/projects` with `parent_project_id: 5` would be correctly rejected with 403.\n\n## Affected versions\n\nIntroduced with the namespace\u2192project migration (commit `fef253312`, first released in v0.21.0) and present through the latest release (v2.3.0). The shared model also backs the new `/api/v2` duplication route under review, so any v2 release would inherit the same flaw unless fixed in the model.\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nIn `ProjectDuplicate.CanCreate`, check write access to the parent directly:\n\n```go\nparent := \u0026Project{ID: pd.ParentProjectID}\nreturn parent.CanWrite(s, a)\n```\n\n`Project.CanWrite` loads the project from the database and evaluates real permissions, fixing both the wrong-method and the unhydrated-struct defects at once and matching the documented contract. (It also rejects archived parents, which is desirable.)",
  "id": "GHSA-f27p-pw2p-9pr4",
  "modified": "2026-08-28T16:37:26Z",
  "published": "2026-08-28T16:37:26Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/security/advisories/GHSA-f27p-pw2p-9pr4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/pull/3239"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/commit/d911caaa11c748c3abc6b98b3189afea2677bcb0"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/releases/tag/v2.4.0"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Vikunja has a project duplication bypasses write-permission check on the target parent project"
}

GHSA-F2HF-PFRJ-VRM7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-06 17:58 – Updated: 2025-10-23 17:43
VLAI
Summary
XWiki OIDC Authenticator: Users with "view" access can create tokens for any users they can view
Details

Impact

Anyone with VIEW access to a user profile can create a token for that user. If that XWiki instance is configured to allow token authentication, it allows authentication with any user (since users are very commonly viewable, at least to other registered users).

Patches

Version 2.18.2.

Workarounds

The only workaround is to disable token access.

References

  • https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/OIDC-240
  • https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/oidc/commit/d90d717172283aaa96bb5bb44e357f910ae64adb

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in Jira XWiki.org * Email us at Security Mailing List

Severity
9.2 (Critical)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.xwiki.contrib.oidc:oidc-authenticator"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.17.1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.18.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-49594"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-10-06T17:58:22Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-10-06T15:16:04Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n\nAnyone with VIEW access to a user profile can create a token for that user. If that XWiki instance is configured to allow token authentication, it allows authentication with any user (since users are very commonly viewable, at least to other registered users).\n\n### Patches\n\nVersion 2.18.2.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nThe only workaround is to disable token access.\n\n### References\n\n* https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/OIDC-240\n* https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/oidc/commit/d90d717172283aaa96bb5bb44e357f910ae64adb\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in [Jira XWiki.org](https://jira.xwiki.org/)\n* Email us at [Security Mailing List](mailto:security@xwiki.org)",
  "id": "GHSA-f2hf-pfrj-vrm7",
  "modified": "2025-10-23T17:43:47Z",
  "published": "2025-10-06T17:58:22Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/oidc/security/advisories/GHSA-f2hf-pfrj-vrm7"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-49594"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/oidc/commit/d90d717172283aaa96bb5bb44e357f910ae64adb"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/oidc"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/OIDC-240"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vicarius.io/vsociety/posts/cve-2025-49594-detect-xwiki-vulnerability"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vicarius.io/vsociety/posts/cve-2025-49594-mitigate-xwiki-vulnerability"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "XWiki OIDC Authenticator: Users with \"view\" access can create tokens for any users they can view"
}

GHSA-F37H-X7MF-GVGP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-04 00:31 – Updated: 2026-09-04 00:31
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability was identified in light0011 cms c774dce31c6df0055568a8d5c53d964d99be199d/f72cf46f601efb2a0618c3814cc2f61380b38930. Affected by this issue is the function AuthController::_initialize of the file App/Admin/Controller/ChapterController.class.php of the component Chapter Controller. The manipulation leads to authorization bypass. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. Continious delivery with rolling releases is used by this product. Therefore, no version details of affected nor updated releases are available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Severity
7.3 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
5.5 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-85378"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-03T23:17:20Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability was identified in light0011 cms c774dce31c6df0055568a8d5c53d964d99be199d/f72cf46f601efb2a0618c3814cc2f61380b38930. Affected by this issue is the function AuthController::_initialize of the file App/Admin/Controller/ChapterController.class.php of the component Chapter Controller. The manipulation leads to authorization bypass. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. Continious delivery with rolling releases is used by this product. Therefore, no version details of affected nor updated releases are available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.",
  "id": "GHSA-f37h-x7mf-gvgp",
  "modified": "2026-09-04T00:31:07Z",
  "published": "2026-09-04T00:31:07Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-85378"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/light0011/cms/issues/4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/light0011/cms"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-85378"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/894787"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/398532"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/398532/cti"
    }
  ],
  "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:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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-F3V6-QMVG-FHWG

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-12 18:30 – Updated: 2024-11-12 18:30
VLAI
Details

Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability

Severity
9.9 (Critical)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-43602"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-12T18:15:28Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability",
  "id": "GHSA-f3v6-qmvg-fhwg",
  "modified": "2024-11-12T18:30:58Z",
  "published": "2024-11-12T18:30:58Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-43602"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-43602"
    }
  ],
  "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-F44G-3VJ9-VWV9

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-06 19:24 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:32
VLAI
Details

In Splunk Enterprise versions below 8.1.13, 8.2.10, and 9.0.4, the ‘sendemail’ REST API endpoint lets any authenticated user send an email as the Splunk instance. The endpoint is now restricted to the ‘splunk-system-user’ account on the local instance.

Severity
4.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-22938"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-02-14T18:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In Splunk Enterprise versions below 8.1.13, 8.2.10, and 9.0.4, the \u2018sendemail\u2019 REST API endpoint lets any authenticated user send an email as the Splunk instance. The endpoint is now restricted to the \u2018splunk-system-user\u2019 account on the local instance.",
  "id": "GHSA-f44g-3vj9-vwv9",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T05:32:58Z",
  "published": "2023-07-06T19:24:09Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-22938"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://advisory.splunk.com/advisories/SVD-2023-0208"
    }
  ],
  "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"
    }
  ]
}
Mitigation
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.
Mitigation
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.

Mitigation MIT-4.4
Architecture and Design

Strategy: 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 [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
Mitigation
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.
Mitigation
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.

CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs

In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.

CAPEC-104: Cross Zone Scripting

An attacker is able to cause a victim to load content into their web-browser that bypasses security zone controls and gain access to increased privileges to execute scripting code or other web objects such as unsigned ActiveX controls or applets. This is a privilege elevation attack targeted at zone-based web-browser security.

CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing

An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.

CAPEC-13: Subverting Environment Variable Values

The adversary directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The adversary's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the adversary.

CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files

An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.

CAPEC-39: Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data Tokens

In circumstances where an application holds important data client-side in tokens (cookies, URLs, data files, and so forth) that data can be manipulated. If client or server-side application components reinterpret that data as authentication tokens or data (such as store item pricing or wallet information) then even opaquely manipulating that data may bear fruit for an Attacker. In this pattern an attacker undermines the assumption that client side tokens have been adequately protected from tampering through use of encryption or obfuscation.

CAPEC-402: Bypassing ATA Password Security

An adversary exploits a weakness in ATA security on a drive to gain access to the information the drive contains without supplying the proper credentials. ATA Security is often employed to protect hard disk information from unauthorized access. The mechanism requires the user to type in a password before the BIOS is allowed access to drive contents. Some implementations of ATA security will accept the ATA command to update the password without the user having authenticated with the BIOS. This occurs because the security mechanism assumes the user has first authenticated via the BIOS prior to sending commands to the drive. Various methods exist for exploiting this flaw, the most common being installing the ATA protected drive into a system lacking ATA security features (a.k.a. hot swapping). Once the drive is installed into the new system the BIOS can be used to reset the drive password.

CAPEC-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links

This type of attack leverages the use of symbolic links to cause buffer overflows. An adversary can try to create or manipulate a symbolic link file such that its contents result in out of bounds data. When the target software processes the symbolic link file, it could potentially overflow internal buffers with insufficient bounds checking.

CAPEC-5: Blue Boxing

This type of attack against older telephone switches and trunks has been around for decades. A tone is sent by an adversary to impersonate a supervisor signal which has the effect of rerouting or usurping command of the line. While the US infrastructure proper may not contain widespread vulnerabilities to this type of attack, many companies are connected globally through call centers and business process outsourcing. These international systems may be operated in countries which have not upgraded Telco infrastructure and so are vulnerable to Blue boxing. Blue boxing is a result of failure on the part of the system to enforce strong authorization for administrative functions. While the infrastructure is different than standard current applications like web applications, there are historical lessons to be learned to upgrade the access control for administrative functions.

{'xhtml:b': 'This attack pattern is included in CAPEC for historical purposes.'}

CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry

SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.

CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction

This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.

CAPEC-60: Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)

This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.

CAPEC-647: Collect Data from Registries

An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization to gather system-specific data and sensitive information within a registry (e.g., Windows Registry, Mac plist). These contain information about the system configuration, software, operating system, and security. The adversary can leverage information gathered in order to carry out further attacks.

CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)

An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.

CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls

An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.

CAPEC-77: Manipulating User-Controlled Variables

This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables.

CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing

An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.

← Back to the CWE list