CWE-273 Details

CWE-273

Improper Check for Dropped Privileges
Mittel
Incomplete
2006-07-19
00h00 +00:00
2023-06-29
00h00 +00:00
CWE Mitre.org
Benachrichtigungen für ein CWE
Bleiben Sie über alle Änderungen zu einem bestimmten CWE informiert.
Benachrichtigungen verwalten

Name: Improper Check for Dropped Privileges

The product attempts to drop privileges but does not check or incorrectly checks to see if the drop succeeded.

CWE-Beschreibung

If the drop fails, the product will continue to run with the raised privileges, which might provide additional access to unprivileged users.

Allgemeine Informationen

Hintergrundinformationen

Einführungsmodi

Implementation

Anwendbare Plattformen

Sprache

Class: Not Language-Specific (Undetermined)

Häufige Konsequenzen

Bereich Auswirkung Wahrscheinlichkeit
Access ControlGain Privileges or Assume Identity

Note: If privileges are not dropped, neither are access rights of the user. Often these rights can be prevented from being dropped.
Access Control
Non-Repudiation		Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Hide Activities

Note: If privileges are not dropped, in some cases the system may record actions as the user which is being impersonated rather than the impersonator.

Beobachtete Beispiele

Referenzen Beschreibung

CVE-2006-4447

Program does not check return value when invoking functions to drop privileges, which could leave users with higher privileges than expected by forcing those functions to fail.

CVE-2006-2916

Program does not check return value when invoking functions to drop privileges, which could leave users with higher privileges than expected by forcing those functions to fail.

Mögliche Gegenmaßnahmen

Phases : Architecture and Design
Phases : Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is expected.
Phases : Implementation
In Windows, make sure that the process token has the SeImpersonatePrivilege(Microsoft Server 2003). Code that relies on impersonation for security must ensure that the impersonation succeeded, i.e., that a proper privilege demotion happened.

Erkennungsmethoden

Automated Static Analysis

Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
Wirksamkeit : High

Hinweise zur Schwachstellen-Zuordnung

Begründung : This CWE entry is at the Base level of abstraction, which is a preferred level of abstraction for mapping to the root causes of vulnerabilities.
Kommentar : Carefully read both the name and description to ensure that this mapping is an appropriate fit. Do not try to 'force' a mapping to a lower-level Base/Variant simply to comply with this preferred level of abstraction.

Referenzen

REF-18

The CLASP Application Security Process
Secure Software, Inc..
https://cwe.mitre.org/documents/sources/TheCLASPApplicationSecurityProcess.pdf

Einreichung

Name Organisation Datum Veröffentlichungsdatum Version
CLASP 2006-07-19 +00:00 2006-07-19 +00:00 Draft 3

Änderungen

Name Organisation Datum Kommentar
Eric Dalci Cigital 2008-07-01 +00:00 updated Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-09-08 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences, Description, Modes_of_Introduction, Relationships, Other_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities
CWE Content Team MITRE 2008-11-24 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-03-10 +00:00 updated Description, Name, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2009-05-27 +00:00 updated Name
CWE Content Team MITRE 2011-06-01 +00:00 updated Common_Consequences
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-05-11 +00:00 updated Observed_Examples, Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2012-10-30 +00:00 updated Demonstrative_Examples, Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2014-06-23 +00:00 updated Background_Details, Other_Notes, Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2014-07-30 +00:00 updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2017-11-08 +00:00 updated Applicable_Platforms, Causal_Nature, Demonstrative_Examples, Modes_of_Introduction, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
CWE Content Team MITRE 2019-01-03 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2019-06-20 +00:00 updated Relationships
CWE Content Team MITRE 2020-02-24 +00:00 updated References, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2020-12-10 +00:00 updated Potential_Mitigations
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-01-31 +00:00 updated Description
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-04-27 +00:00 updated Detection_Factors, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
CWE Content Team MITRE 2023-06-29 +00:00 updated Mapping_Notes
Die auf CVE Find präsentierten Informationen stammen aus mehreren sorgfältig ausgewählten Referenzquellen. CVE-Daten werden von der MITRE Corporation und der National Vulnerability Database (NVD) bereitgestellt. Der Katalog bekannter ausgenutzter Schwachstellen (KEV) stammt von der Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), während EPSS-Scores von FIRST.org kommen. Darüber hinaus werden Daten zu Software-Schwachstellen (CWE) und häufigen Angriffsmustern (CAPEC) von der MITRE Corporation gepflegt, und Informationen zu Hardware- und Software-Konfigurationen (CPE) werden von der NVD bereitgestellt.