CWE-285
DiscouragedImproper Authorization
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
2305 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-RQP8-Q22P-5J9Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-26 21:45 – Updated: 2026-04-10 20:19Summary
Synology Chat multi-account configuration could collapse onto a shared webhook path, replacing route ownership and bypassing per-account DM policy separation.
Affected Packages / Versions
- Package:
openclaw(npm) - Affected: < 2026.3.22
- Fixed: >= 2026.3.22
- Latest released tag checked:
v2026.3.23-2(630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87) - Latest published npm version checked:
2026.3.23-2
Fix Commit(s)
980940aa58f862da4e19372597bbc2a9f268d70b
Release Status
The fix shipped in v2026.3.22 and remains present in v2026.3.23 and v2026.3.23-2.
Code-Level Confirmation
- extensions/synology-chat/src/accounts.ts now distinguishes inherited base webhook paths from explicit per-account paths.
- extensions/synology-chat/src/gateway-runtime.ts now fails closed on inherited or duplicate webhook paths and registers routes without replacement.
OpenClaw thanks @tdjackey for reporting.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "openclaw"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2026.3.22"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-35635"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-26T21:45:35Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\nSynology Chat multi-account configuration could collapse onto a shared webhook path, replacing route ownership and bypassing per-account DM policy separation.\n\n## Affected Packages / Versions\n- Package: `openclaw` (npm)\n- Affected: \u003c 2026.3.22\n- Fixed: \u003e= 2026.3.22\n- Latest released tag checked: `v2026.3.23-2` (`630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87`)\n- Latest published npm version checked: `2026.3.23-2`\n\n## Fix Commit(s)\n- `980940aa58f862da4e19372597bbc2a9f268d70b`\n\n## Release Status\nThe fix shipped in `v2026.3.22` and remains present in `v2026.3.23` and `v2026.3.23-2`.\n\n## Code-Level Confirmation\n- extensions/synology-chat/src/accounts.ts now distinguishes inherited base webhook paths from explicit per-account paths.\n- extensions/synology-chat/src/gateway-runtime.ts now fails closed on inherited or duplicate webhook paths and registers routes without replacement.\n\nOpenClaw thanks @tdjackey for reporting.",
"id": "GHSA-rqp8-q22p-5j9q",
"modified": "2026-04-10T20:19:58Z",
"published": "2026-03-26T21:45:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-rqp8-q22p-5j9q"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35635"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/980940aa58f862da4e19372597bbc2a9f268d70b"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-webhook-path-route-replacement-vulnerability-in-synology-chat"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "OpenClaw Bypasses DM Policy Separation via Synology Chat Webhook Path Collision "
}
GHSA-RQWP-MCM8-RM59
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:43 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:43EMC ViPR SRM before 3.7.2 does not restrict the number of password-authentication attempts, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain access via a brute-force guessing attack.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-0922"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2016-09-18T02:59:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "EMC ViPR SRM before 3.7.2 does not restrict the number of password-authentication attempts, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain access via a brute-force guessing attack.",
"id": "GHSA-rqwp-mcm8-rm59",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:43:10Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:43:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-0922"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/bugtraq/2016/Sep/17"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92945"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RR2G-RRJJ-XW86
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-08 21:31 – Updated: 2025-05-01 19:31Magento versions 2.4.7-p4, 2.4.6-p9, 2.4.5-p11, 2.4.4-p12, 2.4.8-beta2 and earlier are affected by an Improper Authorization vulnerability that could result in Privilege escalation. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.4-p13"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"versions": [
"2.4.4"
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"versions": [
"2.4.5"
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"versions": [
"2.4.6"
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.5-p1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.5-p12"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.6-p1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.6-p10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.7-p1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.7-p5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"versions": [
"2.4.7"
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.8-beta1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-27188"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285",
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-05-01T19:31:13Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-08T21:15:50Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Magento versions 2.4.7-p4, 2.4.6-p9, 2.4.5-p11, 2.4.4-p12, 2.4.8-beta2 and earlier are affected by an Improper Authorization vulnerability that could result in Privilege escalation. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.",
"id": "GHSA-rr2g-rrjj-xw86",
"modified": "2025-05-01T19:31:13Z",
"published": "2025-04-08T21:31:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-27188"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/magento/magento2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/magento/apsb25-26.html"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "Magento Improper Authorization vulnerability"
}
GHSA-RR73-568V-28F8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-05 21:29 – Updated: 2026-05-13 13:52Summary
A business logic vulnerability in the Grav Admin Panel allows a low-privileged user (with only user creation permissions) to overwrite existing accounts, including the primary administrator. By creating a new user with a username that already exists, the system updates the existing account's metadata and permissions instead of rejecting the request. This leads to a Denial of Service (DoS) on administrative functions and Privilege De-escalation of the root account.
Details
The vulnerability stems from an insecure "Create or Update" logic within the user management module. When the admin-addon handles a user creation request, it does not strictly validate whether the username is already taken by a higher-privileged account. Instead of returning a "409 Conflict" or a validation error, the application logic proceeds to overwrite the existing user configuration file (e.g., user/accounts/root0.yaml) with the new, lower-privileged data provided by the attacker. Because the attacker cannot assign higher permissions to themselves (due to existing fixes), the result is that the targeted account (the original Admin/Root) has its access levels wiped or replaced by the attacker's input, effectively locking the real administrator out of the system.
PoC
- Log in as a Super User (e.g., root0) and create a low-privileged user (e.g., adminuser).
- Assign adminuser the following specific permissions: admin.login admin.users.list admin.users.read admin.users.create
- Log out and log back in as adminuser.
- Navigate to User Accounts -> Add.
- Fill in the form with the following details:
Username: root0 (The exact username of the Super User)
Email:
anything@grav.fFullname: Fake Root0 - Click Save.
- Observe that the account is successfully "created".
- The original administrative permissions are gone, and the account is now restricted.
PoC video
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/047cb44e-0279-402b-b4fb-12bf5d427a5e
Impact
This is a Privilege De-escalation and Account Disruption vulnerability. Who is impacted: Any Grav installation where a non-admin user is granted permission to create other users. Consequence: An attacker can effectively disable all administrative accounts on the platform, leading to a complete loss of management control over the CMS.
Maintainer note — fix applied (2026-04-24)
Fixed in Grav core on the 2.0 branch: commit d904efc33 — will ship in 2.0.0-beta.2.
What changed: UserObject::save already had a uniqueness guard (commit 19c2f8da7, November 2025) that blocks the PoC. This release tightens that guard:
strpos($key, '@@')→str_contains($key, '@@'). The previous form was falsy when the transient-key marker was at position 0 (e.g.@@hash), silently bypassing the check.str_containsreturns a proper boolean.- The
instanceof FileStoragegate was dropped so the uniqueness check runs for anyFlexStorageInterfacebackend — not just the default file-per-user YAML one.
A low-privileged user with admin.users.create can no longer disrupt a super-admin account by submitting that admin's username through the "add user" form.
Files:
- system/src/Grav/Common/Flex/Types/Users/UserObject.php.
- tests/unit/Grav/Common/Security/UserOverwriteSecurityTest.php — 3 tests pinning the PoC, the @@-prefix edge case, and pass-through for free usernames.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "getgrav/grav"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.0.0-beta.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-42609"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-269",
"CWE-285",
"CWE-639",
"CWE-837"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-05T21:29:53Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-11T16:17:33Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\nA business logic vulnerability in the Grav Admin Panel allows a low-privileged user (with only user creation permissions) to overwrite existing accounts, including the primary administrator. By creating a new user with a username that already exists, the system updates the existing account\u0027s metadata and permissions instead of rejecting the request. This leads to a Denial of Service (DoS) on administrative functions and Privilege De-escalation of the root account.\n\n### Details\nThe vulnerability stems from an insecure \"Create or Update\" logic within the user management module. When the admin-addon handles a user creation request, it does not strictly validate whether the username is already taken by a higher-privileged account. Instead of returning a \"409 Conflict\" or a validation error, the application logic proceeds to overwrite the existing user configuration file (e.g., user/accounts/root0.yaml) with the new, lower-privileged data provided by the attacker.\nBecause the attacker cannot assign higher permissions to themselves (due to existing fixes), the result is that the targeted account (the original Admin/Root) has its access levels wiped or replaced by the attacker\u0027s input, effectively locking the real administrator out of the system.\n\n### PoC\n1. Log in as a Super User (e.g., root0) and create a low-privileged user (e.g., adminuser).\n2. Assign adminuser the following specific permissions:\nadmin.login\nadmin.users.list\nadmin.users.read\nadmin.users.create\n3. Log out and log back in as adminuser.\n4. Navigate to User Accounts -\u003e Add.\n5. Fill in the form with the following details:\nUsername: root0 (The exact username of the Super User)\nEmail: `anything@grav.f`\nFullname: Fake Root0\n7. Click Save.\n8. Observe that the account is successfully \"created\".\n9. The original administrative permissions are gone, and the account is now restricted.\n\n#### PoC video\nhttps://github.com/user-attachments/assets/047cb44e-0279-402b-b4fb-12bf5d427a5e\n\n### Impact\nThis is a Privilege De-escalation and Account Disruption vulnerability.\nWho is impacted: Any Grav installation where a non-admin user is granted permission to create other users.\nConsequence: An attacker can effectively disable all administrative accounts on the platform, leading to a complete loss of management control over the CMS.\n\n\n---\n\n## Maintainer note \u2014 fix applied (2026-04-24)\n\nFixed in Grav core on the `2.0` branch: commit [`d904efc33`](https://github.com/getgrav/grav/commit/d904efc33) \u2014 will ship in **2.0.0-beta.2**.\n\n**What changed:** `UserObject::save` already had a uniqueness guard (commit [`19c2f8da7`](https://github.com/getgrav/grav/commit/19c2f8da7), November 2025) that blocks the PoC. This release tightens that guard:\n\n1. `strpos($key, \u0027@@\u0027)` \u2192 `str_contains($key, \u0027@@\u0027)`. The previous form was falsy when the transient-key marker was at position 0 (e.g. `@@hash`), silently bypassing the check. `str_contains` returns a proper boolean.\n2. The `instanceof FileStorage` gate was dropped so the uniqueness check runs for any `FlexStorageInterface` backend \u2014 not just the default file-per-user YAML one.\n\nA low-privileged user with `admin.users.create` can no longer disrupt a super-admin account by submitting that admin\u0027s username through the \"add user\" form.\n\n**Files:**\n- [`system/src/Grav/Common/Flex/Types/Users/UserObject.php`](https://github.com/getgrav/grav/blob/2.0/system/src/Grav/Common/Flex/Types/Users/UserObject.php).\n- [`tests/unit/Grav/Common/Security/UserOverwriteSecurityTest.php`](https://github.com/getgrav/grav/blob/2.0/tests/unit/Grav/Common/Security/UserOverwriteSecurityTest.php) \u2014 3 tests pinning the PoC, the `@@`-prefix edge case, and pass-through for free usernames.",
"id": "GHSA-rr73-568v-28f8",
"modified": "2026-05-13T13:52:30Z",
"published": "2026-05-05T21:29:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/getgrav/grav/security/advisories/GHSA-rr73-568v-28f8"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-42609"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/getgrav/grav/commit/5a12f9be8314682c8713e569e330f11805d0a663"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/getgrav/grav/commit/c66dfeb5ff679a1667678c6335eb9ff3255dfc47"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/getgrav/grav/commit/d904efc33e03ebb597afde8d3368b28cf0423632"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/getgrav/grav"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Grav Vulnerable to Administrative Account Disruption and Privilege De-escalation via User Overwrite Logic"
}
GHSA-RV3R-4PVF-F5PM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-13 00:31 – Updated: 2025-11-03 21:33A logic issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.5. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-31249"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-12T22:15:24Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A logic issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.5. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.",
"id": "GHSA-rv3r-4pvf-f5pm",
"modified": "2025-11-03T21:33:53Z",
"published": "2025-05-13T00:31:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-31249"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.apple.com/en-us/122716"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2025/May/7"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RV7W-R25C-4W8X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-18 03:30 – Updated: 2023-05-18 03:30Multiple vulnerabilities in the API of Cisco DNA Center Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to read information from a restricted container, enumerate user information, or execute arbitrary commands in a restricted container as the root user. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-20183"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-18T03:15:11Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Multiple vulnerabilities in the API of Cisco DNA Center Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to read information from a restricted container, enumerate user information, or execute arbitrary commands in a restricted container as the root user. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.",
"id": "GHSA-rv7w-r25c-4w8x",
"modified": "2023-05-18T03:30:21Z",
"published": "2023-05-18T03:30:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-20183"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sec.cloudapps.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-dnac-multiple-kTQkGU3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RVG3-F2HW-545M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-08 18:31 – Updated: 2025-07-08 18:31Improper authorization in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to execute code over a network.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-49701"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-08T17:15:57Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper authorization in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to execute code over a network.",
"id": "GHSA-rvg3-f2hw-545m",
"modified": "2025-07-08T18:31:48Z",
"published": "2025-07-08T18:31:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-49701"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2025-49701"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RVPW-WQ7V-3F3V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:52 – Updated: 2023-08-11 21:30A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to elevate privileges and execute administrative functions on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient authorization validation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by logging in to an affected device as a low-privileged user and then sending specific HTTPS requests to execute administrative functions using the information retrieved during initial login.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-1934"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-08-07T22:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to elevate privileges and execute administrative functions on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient authorization validation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by logging in to an affected device as a low-privileged user and then sending specific HTTPS requests to execute administrative functions using the information retrieved during initial login.",
"id": "GHSA-rvpw-wq7v-3f3v",
"modified": "2023-08-11T21:30:36Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:52:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-1934"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20190807-asa-privescala"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-RW7F-G8XG-MRX7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-24 09:31 – Updated: 2026-04-08 18:33The Originality.ai AI Checker plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized loss of data due to a missing capability check on the 'ai_scan_result_remove' function in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.12. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to delete all data in the wp_originalityai_log database table, which can include post titles, scan scores, credits used, and other data.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-10902"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-24T09:15:42Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Originality.ai AI Checker plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized loss of data due to a missing capability check on the \u0027ai_scan_result_remove\u0027 function in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.12. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to delete all data in the wp_originalityai_log database table, which can include post titles, scan scores, credits used, and other data.",
"id": "GHSA-rw7f-g8xg-mrx7",
"modified": "2026-04-08T18:33:57Z",
"published": "2025-10-24T09:31:58Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-10902"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/originality-ai/trunk/OriginalityAI.php#L532"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3371428"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/80dd4f6a-20dd-4532-913b-ab08f89db836?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-RWF7-652F-76MV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:33 – Updated: 2023-07-20 14:42Magento version 2.4.0 and 2.3.5p1 (and earlier) are affected by an incorrect permissions vulnerability within the Integrations component. This vulnerability could be abused by users with permissions to the Pages resource to delete cms pages via the REST API without authorization.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.3.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "magento/community-edition"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.4.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
],
"versions": [
"2.4.0"
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-24404"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-285"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-20T14:42:12Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2020-11-09T01:15:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "Magento version 2.4.0 and 2.3.5p1 (and earlier) are affected by an incorrect permissions vulnerability within the Integrations component. This vulnerability could be abused by users with permissions to the Pages resource to delete cms pages via the REST API without authorization.",
"id": "GHSA-rwf7-652f-76mv",
"modified": "2023-07-20T14:42:12Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:33:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-24404"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://devdocs.magento.com/guides/v2.3/release-notes/open-source-2-3-6.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/commerce-operations/release/notes/magento-open-source/2-4-1.html"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/magento/magento2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/magento/apsb20-59.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Magento 2 Community Edition vulnerable to Improper Authorization"
}
Mitigation
- 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
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
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
- 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
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.