Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-284

Discouraged

Improper Access Control

Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Incomplete

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.

7803 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-42XW-P62X-HWCF

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:02 – Updated: 2022-06-29 19:13

Summary

Improper Access Control in Apache Derby

Details

In Apache Derby 10.3.1.4 to 10.14.1.0, a specially-crafted network packet can be used to request the Derby Network Server to boot a database whose location and contents are under the user's control. If the Derby Network Server is not running with a Java Security Manager policy file, the attack is successful. If the server is using a policy file, the policy file must permit the database location to be read for the attack to work. The default Derby Network Server policy file distributed with the affected releases includes a permissive policy as the default Network Server policy, which allows the attack to work.

Severity

5.3 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 10.14.1.0"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.apache.derby:derby"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "10.3.1.4"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "10.14.2.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-1313"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2022-06-29T19:13:33Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-05-07T13:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In Apache Derby 10.3.1.4 to 10.14.1.0, a specially-crafted network packet can be used to request the Derby Network Server to boot a database whose location and contents are under the user\u0027s control. If the Derby Network Server is not running with a Java Security Manager policy file, the attack is successful. If the server is using a policy file, the policy file must permit the database location to be read for the attack to work. The default Derby Network Server policy file distributed with the affected releases includes a permissive policy as the default Network Server policy, which allows the attack to work.",
  "id": "GHSA-42xw-p62x-hwcf",
  "modified": "2022-06-29T19:13:33Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:02:18Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-1313"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/519eb0fd45642dcecd9ff74cb3e71c20a4753f7d82e2f07864b5108f@%3Cdev.drill.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b0656d359c7d40ec9f39c8cc61bca66802ef9a2a12ee199f5b0c1442@%3Cdev.drill.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f9bc3e55f4e28d1dcd1a69aae6d53e609a758e34d2869b4d798e13cc@%3Cissues.drill.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r437d94437e6aef31af689b1e7025d024d676fd1ea9901d74e3e9ae48@%3Cissues.hive.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r6755f48d4f5e44e39bba7dbf8d746678239d7f1f2cc108125519ce53@%3Cissues.hive.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/re29ab90978e6c997377fb975f674f7514f6beb642bbf79deb45477e5@%3Cdev.hive.apache.org%3E"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://markmail.org/message/akkappppxcdqrgxk"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2019-5072801.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104140"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Improper Access Control in Apache Derby"
}

GHSA-4363-FQG7-XRX3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-09 18:30 – Updated: 2026-06-09 18:30

Details

Improper access control in Office for Android allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing locally.

Severity

7.1 (High)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-45649"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-09T17:17:32Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Improper access control in Office for Android allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing locally.",
  "id": "GHSA-4363-fqg7-xrx3",
  "modified": "2026-06-09T18:30:53Z",
  "published": "2026-06-09T18:30:53Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-45649"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2026-45649"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-436F-CHR9-2P6R

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:16 – Updated: 2025-09-06 00:30

Details

The Schneider Electric ETG3000 FactoryCast HMI Gateway with firmware before 1.60 IR 04 stores rde.jar under the web root with insufficient access control, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive setup and configuration information via a direct request.

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2014-9197"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284",
      "CWE-306"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2015-01-27T19:59:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "The Schneider Electric ETG3000 FactoryCast HMI Gateway with firmware before 1.60 IR 04 stores rde.jar under the web root with insufficient access control, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive setup and configuration information via a direct request.",
  "id": "GHSA-436f-chr9-2p6r",
  "modified": "2025-09-06T00:30:24Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T04:16:36Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-9197"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/advisories/ICSA-15-020-02"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-15-020-02"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-436V-8FW5-4MJ8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-07 20:13 – Updated: 2026-06-12 19:30

Summary

Local settings bypass config trust checks

Details

Summary

mise loads trust-control settings from a local project .mise.toml before the trust check runs. An attacker who can place a malicious .mise.toml in a repository can make that same file appear trusted and then reach dangerous directives such as [env] _.source, templates, hooks, or tasks.

The strongest current variant is trusted_config_paths = ["/"]. I confirmed on current v2026.3.17 in Docker that this causes an untrusted project config to become trusted during mise hook-env, which then executes an attacker-controlled _.source script. The same preload issue also lets local yes = true / ci = true auto-approve trust prompts on v2026.2.18+, but the primary PoC below uses the stronger trusted_config_paths path.

Details

The vulnerable load order is:

Settings::try_get() preloads local settings files.
parse_settings_file() returns settings_file.settings without checking whether the file is trusted.
trust_check() later consults those already-loaded settings.

The main trust-bypass path is in is_trusted():

let settings = Settings::get();
for p in settings.trusted_config_paths() {
    if canonicalized_path.starts_with(p) {
        add_trusted(canonicalized_path.to_path_buf());
        return true;
    }
}

If a local project file sets:

[settings]
trusted_config_paths = ["/"]

then every absolute path matches, so the same untrusted file is marked trusted before the dangerous-directive guard is reached.

Related variant: trust_check() auto-accepts explicit trust prompts when Settings::get().yes is true, and Settings::try_get() sets yes = true when ci is set. I confirmed that regression on v2026.2.18, but the primary PoC below does not depend on it.

PoC

Test environment:

Docker
linux-arm64
mise v2026.3.17

Negative control:

[env]
_.source = ["./poc.sh"]

mise ls fails with:

Config files in /work/poc/.mise.toml are not trusted.

and /tmp/mise-proof.txt is not created.

Primary exploit:

[settings]
trusted_config_paths = ["/"]

[env]
_.source = ["./poc.sh"]

with:

#!/usr/bin/env bash
echo trusted_paths_hookenv > /tmp/mise-proof.txt

Then:

mise hook-env -s bash --force

Observed:

/tmp/mise-proof.txt => trusted_paths_hookenv

Related regression check:

v2026.2.17: local yes = true does not bypass trust
v2026.2.18: the same local yes = true value auto-approves the trust prompt and the side effect file is created

Impact

An attacker who can place a .mise.toml in a repository can make mise trust and evaluate dangerous directives from that same untrusted file.

Demonstrated on current supported versions:

execution via [env] _.source during mise hook-env
bypass of the protection that mise trust is supposed to provide for dangerous config features

On newer versions, the same root cause also lets local yes / ci values auto-approve explicit trust prompts.

Suggested Fix

Do not honor trust-control settings from non-global project config files.

At minimum, ignore these fields when loading local project config:

trusted_config_paths
yes
ci
paranoid

For example:

pub fn parse_settings_file(path: &Path) -> Result<SettingsPartial> {
    let raw = file::read_to_string(path)?;
    let settings_file: SettingsFile = toml::from_str(&raw)?;
    let mut settings = settings_file.settings;

    if !config::is_global_config(path) {
        settings.yes = None;
        settings.ci = None;
        settings.trusted_config_paths = None;
        settings.paranoid = None;
    }

    Ok(settings)
}

Severity

7.7 (High)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "mise"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2026.2.18"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2026.6.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-35533"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-07T20:13:11Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-04-07T21:17:17Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\n`mise` loads trust-control settings from a local project `.mise.toml` before the trust check runs. An attacker who can place a malicious `.mise.toml` in a repository can make that same file appear trusted and then reach dangerous directives such as `[env] _.source`, templates, hooks, or tasks.\n\nThe strongest current variant is `trusted_config_paths = [\"/\"]`. I confirmed on current `v2026.3.17` in Docker that this causes an untrusted project config to become trusted during `mise hook-env`, which then executes an attacker-controlled `_.source` script. The same preload issue also lets local `yes = true` / `ci = true` auto-approve trust prompts on `v2026.2.18+`, but the primary PoC below uses the stronger `trusted_config_paths` path.\n\n### Details\n\nThe vulnerable load order is:\n\n1. [`Settings::try_get()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/settings.rs#L254-L283) preloads local settings files.\n2. [`parse_settings_file()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/settings.rs#L505-L510) returns `settings_file.settings` without checking whether the file is trusted.\n3. [`trust_check()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/config_file/mod.rs#L297-L321) later consults those already-loaded settings.\n\nThe main trust-bypass path is in [`is_trusted()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/config_file/mod.rs#L324-L387):\n\n```rust\nlet settings = Settings::get();\nfor p in settings.trusted_config_paths() {\n    if canonicalized_path.starts_with(p) {\n        add_trusted(canonicalized_path.to_path_buf());\n        return true;\n    }\n}\n```\n\nIf a local project file sets:\n\n```toml\n[settings]\ntrusted_config_paths = [\"/\"]\n```\n\nthen every absolute path matches, so the same untrusted file is marked trusted before the dangerous-directive guard is reached.\n\nRelated variant: [`trust_check()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/config_file/mod.rs#L307-L316) auto-accepts explicit trust prompts when `Settings::get().yes` is true, and [`Settings::try_get()`](https://github.com/jdx/mise/blob/37997e70cd2216d1a86726fba0c8c09c3986ad06/src/config/settings.rs#L330-L332) sets `yes = true` when `ci` is set. I confirmed that regression on `v2026.2.18`, but the primary PoC below does not depend on it.\n\n### PoC\n\nTest environment:\n\n- Docker\n- `linux-arm64`\n- `mise v2026.3.17`\n\nNegative control:\n\n```toml\n[env]\n_.source = [\"./poc.sh\"]\n```\n\n`mise ls` fails with:\n\n```text\nConfig files in /work/poc/.mise.toml are not trusted.\n```\n\nand `/tmp/mise-proof.txt` is not created.\n\nPrimary exploit:\n\n```toml\n[settings]\ntrusted_config_paths = [\"/\"]\n\n[env]\n_.source = [\"./poc.sh\"]\n```\n\nwith:\n\n```bash\n#!/usr/bin/env bash\necho trusted_paths_hookenv \u003e /tmp/mise-proof.txt\n```\n\nThen:\n\n```bash\nmise hook-env -s bash --force\n```\n\nObserved:\n\n```text\n/tmp/mise-proof.txt =\u003e trusted_paths_hookenv\n```\n\nRelated regression check:\n\n- `v2026.2.17`: local `yes = true` does not bypass trust\n- `v2026.2.18`: the same local `yes = true` value auto-approves the trust prompt and the side effect file is created\n\n### Impact\n\nAn attacker who can place a `.mise.toml` in a repository can make `mise` trust and evaluate dangerous directives from that same untrusted file.\n\nDemonstrated on current supported versions:\n\n- execution via `[env] _.source` during `mise hook-env`\n- bypass of the protection that `mise trust` is supposed to provide for dangerous config features\n\nOn newer versions, the same root cause also lets local `yes` / `ci` values auto-approve explicit trust prompts.\n\n### Suggested Fix\n\nDo not honor trust-control settings from non-global project config files.\n\nAt minimum, ignore these fields when loading local project config:\n\n- `trusted_config_paths`\n- `yes`\n- `ci`\n- `paranoid`\n\nFor example:\n\n```rust\npub fn parse_settings_file(path: \u0026Path) -\u003e Result\u003cSettingsPartial\u003e {\n    let raw = file::read_to_string(path)?;\n    let settings_file: SettingsFile = toml::from_str(\u0026raw)?;\n    let mut settings = settings_file.settings;\n\n    if !config::is_global_config(path) {\n        settings.yes = None;\n        settings.ci = None;\n        settings.trusted_config_paths = None;\n        settings.paranoid = None;\n    }\n\n    Ok(settings)\n}\n```",
  "id": "GHSA-436v-8fw5-4mj8",
  "modified": "2026-06-12T19:30:52Z",
  "published": "2026-04-07T20:13:11Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jdx/mise/security/advisories/GHSA-436v-8fw5-4mj8"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35533"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/jdx/mise"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Local settings bypass config trust checks"
}

GHSA-4383-M935-J5WH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-15 18:30 – Updated: 2024-11-15 18:30

Details

A vulnerability in the payload inspection for Ethernet Industrial Protocol (ENIP) traffic for Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass configured rules for ENIP traffic.

This vulnerability is due to incomplete processing during deep packet inspection for ENIP packets. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted ENIP packet to the targeted interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass configured access control and intrusion policies that should trigger and drop for the ENIP packet.

Severity

5.8 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-34753"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-15T17:15:10Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability in the payload inspection for Ethernet Industrial Protocol (ENIP) traffic for Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass configured rules for ENIP traffic.\n\nThis vulnerability is due to incomplete processing during deep packet inspection for ENIP packets. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted ENIP packet to the targeted interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass configured access control and intrusion policies that should trigger and drop for the ENIP packet.",
  "id": "GHSA-4383-m935-j5wh",
  "modified": "2024-11-15T18:30:51Z",
  "published": "2024-11-15T18:30:51Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-34753"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://sec.cloudapps.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-ftd-enip-bypass-eFsxd8KP"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-439W-V2P7-PGGC

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-19 17:43 – Updated: 2026-03-19 17:43

Summary

Juju has unauthorized access to out-of-scope Kubernetes secrets

Details

Summary

Grantee is able to update secret content using the secret-set tool due to broad Kubernetes access policy. Implications are that it is possible, knowing a Kubernetes secret identifier (e.g. name), to patch without affecting the secret, revealing the value, or, patching while affecting the secrets value.

Details

When a Juju secret is "granted" to an app, that app should be able to read the secret content but not modify it, and should be able to only read secrets that have been granted to it.

Authorization of the secret-set hook tool / controller request is not performed correctly, which allows the grantee to update the secret content and to read or affect other secrets.

PoC

Tested: - two applications in the same controller, same model: one owns the secret, another get a grant - relation between them - secret grant - Linux AMD64, Canonical K8s, Juju 3.6.8 controller, Juju 3.6.9 CLI

Not tested: - admin (user) secrets - cross-model relations - cross-controller relations

⋊> dima@bb ⋊> /c/hexanator on main ◦ juju exec --unit ingress2/0 "secret-add nice=little-value"
secret://9cf1319c-4f4b-44f8-891b-9d1c7d8d3b52/d350nbnmp25c76301ht0
⋊> dima@bb ⋊> /c/hexanator on main ◦ juju show-unit ingress2/0
ingress2/0:
  workload-version: 24.2.0
  opened-ports: []
  charm: ch:amd64/nginx-ingress-integrator-203
  leader: true
  life: alive
  relation-info:
  - relation-id: 11
    endpoint: ingress
    related-endpoint: ingress
    application-data: {}
    related-units:
      evilator/0:
        in-scope: true
        data:
          egress-subnets: 10.152.183.39/32
          ingress-address: 10.152.183.39
          private-address: 10.152.183.39
  - relation-id: 10
    endpoint: nginx-peers
    related-endpoint: nginx-peers
    application-data: {}
    local-unit:
      in-scope: true
      data:
        egress-subnets: 10.152.183.135/32
        ingress-address: 10.152.183.135
        private-address: 10.152.183.135
  provider-id: ingress2-0
  address: 10.1.0.100
⋊> dima@bb ⋊> /c/hexanator on main ◦ juju exec --unit ingress2/0 "secret-grant d350nbnmp25c76301ht0 --relation 11" 
⋊> dima@bb ⋊> /c/hexanator on main ◦ juju exec --unit evilator/0 "secret-set d350nbnmp25c76301ht0 nice=who-is-nice-now" 
updating secrets: permission denied
⋊> dima@bb ⋊> /c/hexanator on main ◦ juju exec --unit ingress2/0 "secret-get d350nbnmp25c76301ht0" 
nice: who-is-nice-now

When the grantee attempts to update the the granted secret:

secret-set command logs an error, though returns OK return status
the secret value is updated
new secret revision is not created
new value is visible to both owner and grantee

Impact

the application that owns the secret
a third application, if a secret is granted to multiple parties
any other application that has secrets in the same Kubernetes secret backend

Severity

8.8 (High)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/juju/juju"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.0.0-20221021155847-35c560704ee2"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.0.0-20260319091847-d06919eb03ec"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-32693"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-19T17:43:37Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T13:16:18Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nGrantee is able to update secret content using the `secret-set` tool due to broad Kubernetes access policy.\nImplications are that it is possible, knowing a Kubernetes secret identifier (e.g. name), to patch without affecting the secret, revealing the value, or, patching while affecting the secrets value.\n\n### Details\n\nWhen a Juju secret is \"granted\" to an app, that app should be able to read the secret content but not modify it, and should be able to only read secrets that have been granted to it.\n\nAuthorization of the `secret-set` hook tool / controller request is not performed correctly, which allows the grantee to update the secret content and to read or affect other secrets.\n\n### PoC\n\nTested:\n- two applications in the same controller, same model: one owns the secret, another get a grant\n- relation between them\n- secret grant\n- Linux AMD64, Canonical K8s, Juju 3.6.8 controller, Juju 3.6.9 CLI\n\nNot tested:\n- admin (user) secrets\n- cross-model relations\n- cross-controller relations\n\n```command\n\u22ca\u003e dima@bb \u22ca\u003e /c/hexanator on main \u25e6 juju exec --unit ingress2/0 \"secret-add nice=little-value\"\nsecret://9cf1319c-4f4b-44f8-891b-9d1c7d8d3b52/d350nbnmp25c76301ht0\n\u22ca\u003e dima@bb \u22ca\u003e /c/hexanator on main \u25e6 juju show-unit ingress2/0\ningress2/0:\n  workload-version: 24.2.0\n  opened-ports: []\n  charm: ch:amd64/nginx-ingress-integrator-203\n  leader: true\n  life: alive\n  relation-info:\n  - relation-id: 11\n    endpoint: ingress\n    related-endpoint: ingress\n    application-data: {}\n    related-units:\n      evilator/0:\n        in-scope: true\n        data:\n          egress-subnets: 10.152.183.39/32\n          ingress-address: 10.152.183.39\n          private-address: 10.152.183.39\n  - relation-id: 10\n    endpoint: nginx-peers\n    related-endpoint: nginx-peers\n    application-data: {}\n    local-unit:\n      in-scope: true\n      data:\n        egress-subnets: 10.152.183.135/32\n        ingress-address: 10.152.183.135\n        private-address: 10.152.183.135\n  provider-id: ingress2-0\n  address: 10.1.0.100\n\u22ca\u003e dima@bb \u22ca\u003e /c/hexanator on main \u25e6 juju exec --unit ingress2/0 \"secret-grant d350nbnmp25c76301ht0 --relation 11\" \n\u22ca\u003e dima@bb \u22ca\u003e /c/hexanator on main \u25e6 juju exec --unit evilator/0 \"secret-set d350nbnmp25c76301ht0 nice=who-is-nice-now\" \nupdating secrets: permission denied\n\u22ca\u003e dima@bb \u22ca\u003e /c/hexanator on main \u25e6 juju exec --unit ingress2/0 \"secret-get d350nbnmp25c76301ht0\" \nnice: who-is-nice-now\n```\n\nWhen the grantee attempts to update the the granted secret:\n\n- `secret-set` command logs an error, though returns OK return status\n- the secret value is updated\n- new secret revision is not created\n- new value is visible to both owner and grantee\n\n### Impact\n\n- the application that owns the secret\n- a third application, if a secret is granted to multiple parties\n- any other application that has secrets in the same Kubernetes secret backend",
  "id": "GHSA-439w-v2p7-pggc",
  "modified": "2026-03-19T17:43:37Z",
  "published": "2026-03-19T17:43:37Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-439w-v2p7-pggc"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32693"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/d06919eb03ec68156818bcc304b5fe1c39a8f9e9"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/juju/juju"
    }
  ],
  "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"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Juju has unauthorized access to out-of-scope Kubernetes secrets"
}

GHSA-43C5-49XG-VM7P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 02:22 – Updated: 2022-05-17 02:22

Details

Unspecified vulnerability in the PeopleSoft Enterprise HCM component in Oracle PeopleSoft Products 9.2 allows remote administrators to affect confidentiality and integrity via vectors related to Candidate Gateway.

Severity

4.8 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2016-8285"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2016-10-25T14:31:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Unspecified vulnerability in the PeopleSoft Enterprise HCM component in Oracle PeopleSoft Products 9.2 allows remote administrators to affect confidentiality and integrity via vectors related to Candidate Gateway.",
  "id": "GHSA-43c5-49xg-vm7p",
  "modified": "2022-05-17T02:22:44Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T02:22:44Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-8285"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2016-2881722.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93723"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1037046"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-43CQ-C2GQ-PFPW

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-02 18:47 – Updated: 2026-07-02 18:47

Summary

Craft CMS: Authorization bypass in `entries/move-to-section` via missing target-section save check

Details

Summary

The EntriesController::actionMoveToSection() endpoint checks only whether the current user can view the destination section, but it does not require permission to save entries into that section. A low-privileged authenticated control-panel user who can move an entry out of its current section can therefore move that entry into a different section where they have read access but no write access.

Details

The vulnerable route is implemented in EntriesController.php:465:

The destination check is only viewEntries:$section->uid . The source-entry gate is Entry::canMove(), which verifies whether the user can move the existing entry based on the source section:

This closes the exploit chain:

External source: authenticated CP request to entries/move-to-section.
Missing authorization check: destination section requires only viewEntries, not saveEntries.
Privileged sink: moveEntryToSection() rewrites sectionId and saves the entry into the unauthorized section.

Preconditions derived from the code:

The attacker is authenticated to the control panel.
Entry 345 is movable by the attacker from its current section.
The attacker can satisfy viewEntries on destination section 12.
The attacker does not have saveEntries:DESTINATION_UID, which is the missing check that makes the bypass possible.

Result:

The controller accepts the request because viewEntries:$section->uid passes.
Each source entry passes canMove() based on source-section permissions.
moveEntryToSection() updates the entry’s sectionId and saves it.
The entry is now located in a section where the attacker did not have write permission.

Impact

This breaks the intended section-level authorization model. A user with limited content permissions can inject or relocate content into a protected section, interfering with editorial boundaries, approval workflows, section-specific business logic, and content ownership expectations.

Severity

6.0 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "craftcms/cms"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.0.0-RC1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.9.21"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-50280"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-02T18:47:37Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-07-02T00:16:44Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nThe `EntriesController::actionMoveToSection()` endpoint checks only whether the current user can view the destination section, but it does not require permission to save entries into that section. A low-privileged authenticated control-panel user who can move an entry out of its current section can therefore move that entry into a different section where they have read access but no write access.\n\n### Details\n\nThe vulnerable route is implemented in [EntriesController.php](/D:/files/projects/cms-5.9.19/cms-5.9.19/src/controllers/EntriesController.php):465:\n\nThe destination check is only `viewEntries:$section-\u003euid` . The source-entry gate is `Entry::canMove()`, which verifies whether the user can move the existing entry based on the source section:\n\nThis closes the exploit chain:\n\n1. External source: authenticated CP request to `entries/move-to-section`.\n2. Missing authorization check: destination section requires only `viewEntries`, not `saveEntries`.\n3. Privileged sink: `moveEntryToSection()` rewrites `sectionId` and saves the entry into the unauthorized section.\n\nPreconditions derived from the code:\n\n1. The attacker is authenticated to the control panel.\n2. Entry `345` is movable by the attacker from its current section.\n3. The attacker can satisfy `viewEntries` on destination section `12`.\n4. The attacker does not have `saveEntries:DESTINATION_UID`, which is the missing check that makes the bypass possible.\n\nResult:\n\n1. The controller accepts the request because `viewEntries:$section-\u003euid` passes.\n2. Each source entry passes `canMove()` based on source-section permissions.\n3. `moveEntryToSection()` updates the entry\u2019s `sectionId` and saves it.\n4. The entry is now located in a section where the attacker did not have write permission.\n\n### Impact\n\nThis breaks the intended section-level authorization model. A user with limited content permissions can inject or relocate content into a protected section, interfering with editorial boundaries, approval workflows, section-specific business logic, and content ownership expectations.",
  "id": "GHSA-43cq-c2gq-pfpw",
  "modified": "2026-07-02T18:47:37Z",
  "published": "2026-07-02T18:47:37Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/craftcms/cms/security/advisories/GHSA-43cq-c2gq-pfpw"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-50280"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/craftcms/cms/commit/0a6b916f6367b0162b2eaf2366add67b45fa98ea"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/craftcms/cms"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Craft CMS: Authorization bypass in `entries/move-to-section` via missing target-section save check"
}

GHSA-43H2-3JVW-FM7R

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-22 00:30 – Updated: 2025-06-22 00:30

Details

A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Campcodes Online Recruitment Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=save_settings of the component About Content Page. The manipulation of the argument img leads to unrestricted upload. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Severity

6.3 (Medium)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

2.1 (Low)


                  
                    CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-6422"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-06-21T23:15:24Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Campcodes Online Recruitment Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=save_settings of the component About Content Page. The manipulation of the argument img leads to unrestricted upload. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.",
  "id": "GHSA-43h2-3jvw-fm7r",
  "modified": "2025-06-22T00:30:29Z",
  "published": "2025-06-22T00:30:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-6422"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Sp1d3rL1/CVE/issues/2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.313417"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.313417"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.598211"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.campcodes.com"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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-43HM-C86X-PPXJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-29 15:32 – Updated: 2024-10-29 15:32

Details

In version 1.3.2 of lunary-ai/lunary, an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability exists. A user can view or delete external users by manipulating the 'id' parameter in the request URL. The application does not perform adequate checks on the 'id' parameter, allowing unauthorized access to external user data.

Severity

9.1 (Critical)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-7474"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284",
      "CWE-639"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-10-29T13:15:09Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "In version 1.3.2 of lunary-ai/lunary, an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability exists. A user can view or delete external users by manipulating the \u0027id\u0027 parameter in the request URL. The application does not perform adequate checks on the \u0027id\u0027 parameter, allowing unauthorized access to external user data.",
  "id": "GHSA-43hm-c86x-ppxj",
  "modified": "2024-10-29T15:32:05Z",
  "published": "2024-10-29T15:32:05Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-7474"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/lunary-ai/lunary/commit/8f563c77d8614a72980113f530c7a9ec15a5f8d5"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/95d8b993-3347-4ef5-a2b3-1f57219b7871"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation MIT-1

Architecture and Design Operation

Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.

Mitigation MIT-46

Architecture and Design

Strategy: Separation of Privilege

Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.

CAPEC-19: Embedding Scripts within Scripts

An adversary leverages the capability to execute their own script by embedding it within other scripts that the target software is likely to execute due to programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute scripts.

CAPEC-441: Malicious Logic Insertion

An adversary installs or adds malicious logic (also known as malware) into a seemingly benign component of a fielded system. This logic is often hidden from the user of the system and works behind the scenes to achieve negative impacts. With the proliferation of mass digital storage and inexpensive multimedia devices, Bluetooth and 802.11 support, new attack vectors for spreading malware are emerging for things we once thought of as innocuous greeting cards, picture frames, or digital projectors. This pattern of attack focuses on systems already fielded and used in operation as opposed to systems and their components that are still under development and part of the supply chain.

CAPEC-478: Modification of Windows Service Configuration

An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to modify the execution parameters of a Windows service. The goal of this attack is to execute a malicious binary in place of an existing service.

CAPEC-479: Malicious Root Certificate

An adversary exploits a weakness in authorization and installs a new root certificate on a compromised system. Certificates are commonly used for establishing secure TLS/SSL communications within a web browser. When a user attempts to browse a website that presents a certificate that is not trusted an error message will be displayed to warn the user of the security risk. Depending on the security settings, the browser may not allow the user to establish a connection to the website. Adversaries have used this technique to avoid security warnings prompting users when compromised systems connect over HTTPS to adversary controlled web servers that spoof legitimate websites in order to collect login credentials.

CAPEC-502: Intent Spoof

An adversary, through a previously installed malicious application, issues an intent directed toward a specific trusted application's component in an attempt to achieve a variety of different objectives including modification of data, information disclosure, and data injection. Components that have been unintentionally exported and made public are subject to this type of an attack. If the component trusts the intent's action without verififcation, then the target application performs the functionality at the adversary's request, helping the adversary achieve the desired negative technical impact.

CAPEC-503: WebView Exposure

An adversary, through a malicious web page, accesses application specific functionality by leveraging interfaces registered through WebView's addJavascriptInterface API. Once an interface is registered to WebView through addJavascriptInterface, it becomes global and all pages loaded in the WebView can call this interface.

CAPEC-536: Data Injected During Configuration

An attacker with access to data files and processes on a victim's system injects malicious data into critical operational data during configuration or recalibration, causing the victim's system to perform in a suboptimal manner that benefits the adversary.

CAPEC-546: Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant Environment

An adversary obtains unauthorized information due to insecure or incomplete data deletion in a multi-tenant environment. If a cloud provider fails to completely delete storage and data from former cloud tenants' systems/resources, once these resources are allocated to new, potentially malicious tenants, the latter can probe the provided resources for sensitive information still there.

CAPEC-550: Install New Service

When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Adversaries may install a new service which will be executed at startup (on a Windows system, by modifying the registry). The service name may be disguised by using a name from a related operating system or benign software. Services are usually run with elevated privileges.

CAPEC-551: Modify Existing Service

When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Modifying existing services may break existing services or may enable services that are disabled/not commonly used.

CAPEC-552: Install Rootkit

An adversary exploits a weakness in authentication to install malware that alters the functionality and information provide by targeted operating system API calls. Often referred to as rootkits, it is often used to hide the presence of programs, files, network connections, services, drivers, and other system components.

CAPEC-556: Replace File Extension Handlers

When a file is opened, its file handler is checked to determine which program opens the file. File handlers are configuration properties of many operating systems. Applications can modify the file handler for a given file extension to call an arbitrary program when a file with the given extension is opened.

CAPEC-558: Replace Trusted Executable

An adversary exploits weaknesses in privilege management or access control to replace a trusted executable with a malicious version and enable the execution of malware when that trusted executable is called.

CAPEC-562: Modify Shared File

An adversary manipulates the files in a shared location by adding malicious programs, scripts, or exploit code to valid content. Once a user opens the shared content, the tainted content is executed.

CAPEC-563: Add Malicious File to Shared Webroot

An adversaries may add malicious content to a website through the open file share and then browse to that content with a web browser to cause the server to execute the content. The malicious content will typically run under the context and permissions of the web server process, often resulting in local system or administrative privileges depending on how the web server is configured.

CAPEC-564: Run Software at Logon

Operating system allows logon scripts to be run whenever a specific user or users logon to a system. If adversaries can access these scripts, they may insert additional code into the logon script. This code can allow them to maintain persistence or move laterally within an enclave because it is executed every time the affected user or users logon to a computer. Modifying logon scripts can effectively bypass workstation and enclave firewalls. Depending on the access configuration of the logon scripts, either local credentials or a remote administrative account may be necessary.

CAPEC-578: Disable Security Software

An adversary exploits a weakness in access control to disable security tools so that detection does not occur. This can take the form of killing processes, deleting registry keys so that tools do not start at run time, deleting log files, or other methods.

← Back to the CWE list