Automated static analysis is useful for detecting commonly-used idioms for authorization. A tool may be able to analyze related configuration files, such as .htaccess in Apache web servers, or detect the usage of commonly-used authorization libraries. Generally, automated static analysis tools have difficulty detecting custom authorization schemes. In addition, the software's design may include some functionality that is accessible to any user and does not require an authorization check; an automated technique that detects the absence of authorization may report false positives.
CWE-285 Class Draft
Improper Authorization
This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly verify whether a user has permission to access specific data or perform certain actions before allowing the request.
Definition
What is CWE-285?
This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly verify whether a user has permission to access specific data or perform certain actions before allowing the request.
Authorization is the security gatekeeper that decides what an authenticated user is allowed to do. It checks a user's privileges against defined permissions before granting access to resources like files, database records, or administrative functions. When this check is missing, inconsistent, or flawed, the gate is left open.
Failing to enforce proper authorization can have severe consequences. Attackers or regular users may exploit this weakness to view sensitive data they shouldn't see, modify or delete critical information, disrupt services for others, or even execute unauthorized commands. This makes improper authorization a root cause for data breaches, system compromise, and privilege escalation attacks.
Real-world impact
Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-285
-
Go-based continuous deployment product does not check that a user has certain privileges to update or create an app, allowing adversaries to read sensitive repository information
-
Web application does not restrict access to admin scripts, allowing authenticated users to reset administrative passwords.
-
Web application does not restrict access to admin scripts, allowing authenticated users to modify passwords of other users.
-
Web application stores database file under the web root with insufficient access control (CWE-219), allowing direct request.
-
Terminal server does not check authorization for guest access.
-
Database server does not use appropriate privileges for certain sensitive operations.
-
Gateway uses default "Allow" configuration for its authorization settings.
-
Chain: product does not properly interpret a configuration option for a system group, allowing users to gain privileges.
How attackers exploit it
Step-by-step attacker path
- 1
This function runs an arbitrary SQL query on a given database, returning the result of the query.
- 2
While this code is careful to avoid SQL Injection, the function does not confirm the user sending the query is authorized to do so. An attacker may be able to obtain sensitive employee information from the database.
- 3
The following program could be part of a bulletin board system that allows users to send private messages to each other. This program intends to authenticate the user before deciding whether a private message should be displayed. Assume that LookupMessageObject() ensures that the $id argument is numeric, constructs a filename based on that id, and reads the message details from that file. Also assume that the program stores all private messages for all users in the same directory.
- 4
While the program properly exits if authentication fails, it does not ensure that the message is addressed to the user. As a result, an authenticated attacker could provide any arbitrary identifier and read private messages that were intended for other users.
- 5
One way to avoid this problem would be to ensure that the "to" field in the message object matches the username of the authenticated user.
Vulnerable code example
Vulnerable PHP
This function runs an arbitrary SQL query on a given database, returning the result of the query.
function runEmployeeQuery($dbName, $name){
mysql_select_db($dbName,$globalDbHandle) or die("Could not open Database".$dbName);
```
//Use a prepared statement to avoid CWE-89*
$preparedStatement = $globalDbHandle->prepare('SELECT * FROM employees WHERE name = :name');
$preparedStatement->execute(array(':name' => $name));
return $preparedStatement->fetchAll();}
*/.../*
$employeeRecord = runEmployeeQuery('EmployeeDB',$_GET['EmployeeName']); Secure code example
Secure pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
return executeWithGuards(safe);
} What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Prevention checklist
How to prevent CWE-285
- Architecture and Design Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
- Architecture and Design Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- 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.
Detection signals
How to detect CWE-285
Automated dynamic analysis may find many or all possible interfaces that do not require authorization, but manual analysis is required to determine if the lack of authorization violates business logic
This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session. Specifically, manual static analysis is useful for evaluating the correctness of custom authorization mechanisms.
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Web Application Scanner Web Services Scanner Database Scanners
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Host Application Interface Scanner Fuzz Tester Framework-based Fuzzer Forced Path Execution Monitored Virtual Environment - run potentially malicious code in sandbox / wrapper / virtual machine, see if it does anything suspicious
Plexicus auto-detects CWE-285 and opens a fix PR in under 60 seconds.
Codex Remedium scans every commit, identifies this exact weakness, and ships a reviewer-ready pull request with the patch. No tickets. No hand-offs.
Frequently asked questions What is CWE-285?
How serious is CWE-285?
What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-285?
How can I prevent CWE-285?
How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-285?
Where can I learn more about CWE-285?
Frequently asked questions
What is CWE-285?
This vulnerability occurs when an application fails to properly verify whether a user has permission to access specific data or perform certain actions before allowing the request.
How serious is CWE-285?
MITRE rates the likelihood of exploit as High — this weakness is actively exploited in the wild and should be prioritized for remediation.
What languages or platforms are affected by CWE-285?
MITRE lists the following affected platforms: Web Server, Database Server.
How can I prevent CWE-285?
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. Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be…
How does Plexicus detect and fix CWE-285?
Plexicus's SAST engine matches the data-flow signature for CWE-285 on every commit. When a match is found, our Codex Remedium agent opens a fix PR with the corrected code, tests, and a one-line summary for the reviewer.
Where can I learn more about CWE-285?
MITRE publishes the canonical definition at https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/285.html. You can also reference OWASP and NIST documentation for adjacent guidance.
Related weaknesses
Weaknesses related to CWE-285
CWE-284 Parent
Improper Access Control
The software fails to properly limit who can access a resource, allowing unauthorized users or systems to interact with it.
CWE-1191 Sibling
On-Chip Debug and Test Interface With Improper Access Control
This vulnerability occurs when a hardware chip's debug or test interface (like JTAG) lacks proper access controls. Without correct…
CWE-1220 Sibling
Insufficient Granularity of Access Control
This vulnerability occurs when a system's access controls are too broad, allowing unauthorized users or processes to read or modify…
CWE-1224 Sibling
Improper Restriction of Write-Once Bit Fields
This vulnerability occurs when hardware write-once protection mechanisms, often called 'sticky bits,' are incorrectly implemented,…
CWE-1231 Sibling
Improper Prevention of Lock Bit Modification
This vulnerability occurs when hardware or firmware uses a lock bit to protect critical system registers or memory regions, but fails to…
CWE-1233 Sibling
Security-Sensitive Hardware Controls with Missing Lock Bit Protection
This vulnerability occurs when a hardware device uses a lock bit to protect critical configuration registers, but the lock fails to…
CWE-1252 Sibling
CPU Hardware Not Configured to Support Exclusivity of Write and Execute Operations
This vulnerability occurs when a CPU's hardware is not set up to enforce a strict separation between writing data to memory and executing…
CWE-1257 Sibling
Improper Access Control Applied to Mirrored or Aliased Memory Regions
This vulnerability occurs when a hardware design maps the same physical memory to multiple addresses (aliasing or mirroring) but fails to…
CWE-1259 Sibling
Improper Restriction of Security Token Assignment
This vulnerability occurs when a System-on-a-Chip (SoC) fails to properly secure its Security Token mechanism. These tokens control which…
Resources
Further reading
- MITRE — official CWE-285 https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/285.html
- Seven Pernicious Kingdoms: A Taxonomy of Software Security Errors https://samate.nist.gov/SSATTM_Content/papers/Seven%20Pernicious%20Kingdoms%20-%20Taxonomy%20of%20Sw%20Security%20Errors%20-%20Tsipenyuk%20-%20Chess%20-%20McGraw.pdf
- Role Based Access Control and Role Based Security https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/role-based-access-control
- Writing Secure Code https://www.microsoftpressstore.com/store/writing-secure-code-9780735617223
- Top 25 Series - Rank 5 - Improper Access Control (Authorization) https://www.sans.org/blog/top-25-series-rank-5-improper-access-control-authorization
- OWASP Enterprise Security API (ESAPI) Project https://owasp.org/www-project-enterprise-security-api/
- Authentication using JAAS https://javaranch.com/journal/2008/04/authentication-using-JAAS.html
Ready when you are
Don't Let Security
Weigh You Down.
Stop choosing between AI velocity and security debt. Plexicus is the only platform that runs Vibe Coding Security and ASPM in parallel — one workflow, every codebase.