[Survey] The attacker surveys the target application, possibly as a valid and authenticated user
[Identify Functionality] At each step, the attacker notes the resource or functionality access mechanism invoked upon performing specific actions
[Iterate over access capabilities] Possibly as a valid user, the attacker then tries to access each of the noted access mechanisms directly in order to perform functions not constrained by the ACLs.
In a J2EE setting, administrators can associate a role that is impossible for the authenticator to grant users, such as "NoAccess", with all Servlets to which access is guarded by a limited number of servlets visible to, and accessible by, the user.
Having done so, any direct access to those protected Servlets will be prohibited by the web container.
In a more general setting, the administrator must mark every resource besides the ones supposed to be exposed to the user as accessible by a role impossible for the user to assume. The default security setting must be to deny access and then grant access only to those resources intended by business logic.
Weakness Name | |
---|---|
Incorrect Default Permissions During installation, installed file permissions are set to allow anyone to modify those files. |
|
Improper Authorization The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action. |
|
Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type The product allows the upload or transfer of dangerous file types that are automatically processed within its environment. |
|
Protection Mechanism Failure The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product. |
|
Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors. |
|
On-Chip Debug and Test Interface With Improper Access Control The chip does not implement or does not correctly perform access control to check whether users are authorized to access internal registers and test modes through the physical debug/test interface. |
|
Power-On of Untrusted Execution Core Before Enabling Fabric Access Control The product enables components that contain untrusted firmware before memory and fabric access controls have been enabled. |
|
Insufficient Granularity of Access Control The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets. |
|
Unprotected Confidential Information on Device is Accessible by OSAT Vendors The product does not adequately protect confidential information on the device from being accessed by Outsourced Semiconductor Assembly and Test (OSAT) vendors. |
|
Improper Translation of Security Attributes by Fabric Bridge The bridge incorrectly translates security attributes from either trusted to untrusted or from untrusted to trusted when converting from one fabric protocol to another. |
|
Missing Write Protection for Parametric Data Values The device does not write-protect the parametric data values for sensors that scale the sensor value, allowing untrusted software to manipulate the apparent result and potentially damage hardware or cause operational failure. |
|
Improper Setting of Bus Controlling Capability in Fabric End-point The bus controller enables bits in the fabric end-point to allow responder devices to control transactions on the fabric. |
|
Missing Support for Security Features in On-chip Fabrics or Buses On-chip fabrics or buses either do not support or are not configured to support privilege separation or other security features, such as access control. |
|
Improper Protection for Outbound Error Messages and Alert Signals Untrusted agents can disable alerts about signal conditions exceeding limits or the response mechanism that handles such alerts. |
|
Improperly Controlled Modification of Object Prototype Attributes ('Prototype Pollution') The product receives input from an upstream component that specifies attributes that are to be initialized or updated in an object, but it does not properly control modifications of attributes of the object prototype. |
|
Binding to an Unrestricted IP Address The product assigns the address 0.0.0.0 for a database server, a cloud service/instance, or any computing resource that communicates remotely. |
Name | Organization | Date | Date Release |
---|---|---|---|
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation |
Name | Organization | Date | Comment |
---|---|---|---|
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Attack_Pattern, References | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Attack_Pattern, Description Summary | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Related_Weaknesses, Skills_Required, Taxonomy_Mappings | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Related_Weaknesses | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Related_Weaknesses | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Related_Weaknesses | |
CAPEC Content Team | The MITRE Corporation | Updated Related_Weaknesses |