CWE-732
Allowed-with-ReviewIncorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource
Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft
The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.
2075 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-R246-WJVH-GV57
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-11-13 00:30 – Updated: 2023-11-17 21:30Local attacker can escalate privileges on affected installations of Check Point Harmony Endpoint/ZoneAlarm Extreme Security. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-28134"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-11-12T23:15:09Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Local attacker can escalate privileges on affected installations of Check Point Harmony Endpoint/ZoneAlarm Extreme Security. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-r246-wjvh-gv57",
"modified": "2023-11-17T21:30:26Z",
"published": "2023-11-13T00:30:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-28134"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk181597"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R2GF-386X-6Q74
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-05 00:31 – Updated: 2026-06-06 03:31Insufficient policy enforcement in Extensions in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed an attacker who convinced a user to install a malicious extension to bypass discretionary access control via a crafted Chrome Extension. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-10997"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-04T23:17:03Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in Extensions in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed an attacker who convinced a user to install a malicious extension to bypass discretionary access control via a crafted Chrome Extension. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-r2gf-386x-6q74",
"modified": "2026-06-06T03:31:20Z",
"published": "2026-06-05T00:31:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-10997"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/464217867"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R33R-8F25-2V5P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:01 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:01An exploitable local privilege elevation vulnerability exists in the file system permissions of GOG Galaxy's install directory. An attacker can overwrite an executable that is launched as a system service on boot by default to exploit this vulnerability and execute arbitrary code with system privileges.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-3974"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-04-02T16:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An exploitable local privilege elevation vulnerability exists in the file system permissions of GOG Galaxy\u0027s install directory. An attacker can overwrite an executable that is launched as a system service on boot by default to exploit this vulnerability and execute arbitrary code with system privileges.",
"id": "GHSA-r33r-8f25-2v5p",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:01:49Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:01:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-3974"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2018-0640"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R36R-8JRX-92CQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-11 15:30 – Updated: 2026-02-11 15:30Incorrect permission assignment in AMD µProf may allow a local user-privileged attacker to achieve privilege escalation, potentially resulting in arbitrary code execution.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-61969"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-11T15:16:15Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Incorrect permission assignment in AMD \u00b5Prof may allow a local user-privileged attacker to achieve privilege escalation, potentially resulting in arbitrary code execution.",
"id": "GHSA-r36r-8jrx-92cq",
"modified": "2026-02-11T15:30:27Z",
"published": "2026-02-11T15:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-61969"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.amd.com/en/resources/product-security/bulletin/AMD-SB-9022.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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-R3HV-M3J5-MRFP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:47 – Updated: 2022-07-13 00:01An issue was discovered in Zulip Server before 3.4. A bug in the implementation of the all_public_streams API feature resulted in guest users being able to receive message traffic to public streams that should have been only accessible to members of the organization.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-30479"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-04-15T00:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Zulip Server before 3.4. A bug in the implementation of the all_public_streams API feature resulted in guest users being able to receive message traffic to public streams that should have been only accessible to members of the organization.",
"id": "GHSA-r3hv-m3j5-mrfp",
"modified": "2022-07-13T00:01:21Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:47:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-30479"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.zulip.com/2021/04/14/zulip-server-3-4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R3R2-35V9-V238
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-23 21:40 – Updated: 2026-06-05 14:26Impact
If a developer uses Briefcase to produce an Windows MSI installer for a project, and that project is installed for All Users (i.e., per-machine scope), the installation process creates an directory that inherits all the permissions of the parent directory. Depending on the location chosen by the installing user, this may allow a low privilege but authenticated user to replace or modify the binaries installed by the application. If an administrator then runs the altered binary, the binary will run with elevated privileges.
Patches
The problem is caused by the template used to generate the WXS file for Windows projects. It was fixed with the following PRs:
- beeware/briefcase-windows-app-template#86
- beeware/briefcase-windows-VisualStudio-template#85
These patches have been backported to the templates used in Briefcase 0.3.26, 0.4.0, and 0.4.1. Re-running briefcase create on your Briefcase project will result in the updated templates being used.
Workarounds
The change from beeware/briefcase-windows-app-template#86 can be added to any existing Briefcase .wxs file generated by Briefcase 0.3.24 or later.
Resources
beeware/briefcase#2759 is a formal bug report of the problem.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "briefcase"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.3.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.3.26"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-33430"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-23T21:40:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-26T17:16:38Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nIf a developer uses Briefcase to produce an Windows MSI installer for a project, and that project is installed for All Users (i.e., per-machine scope), the installation process creates an directory that inherits all the permissions of the parent directory. Depending on the location chosen by the installing user, this may allow a low privilege but authenticated user to replace or modify the binaries installed by the application. If an administrator then runs the altered binary, the binary will run with elevated privileges.\n\n### Patches\n\nThe problem is caused by the template used to generate the WXS file for Windows projects. It was fixed with the following PRs:\n\n* beeware/briefcase-windows-app-template#86\n* beeware/briefcase-windows-VisualStudio-template#85\n\nThese patches have been backported to the templates used in Briefcase 0.3.26, 0.4.0, and 0.4.1. Re-running `briefcase create` on your Briefcase project will result in the updated templates being used.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nThe change from beeware/briefcase-windows-app-template#86 can be added to any existing Briefcase .wxs file generated by Briefcase 0.3.24 or later.\n\n### Resources\n\nbeeware/briefcase#2759 is a formal bug report of the problem.",
"id": "GHSA-r3r2-35v9-v238",
"modified": "2026-06-05T14:26:48Z",
"published": "2026-03-23T21:40:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/beeware/briefcase/security/advisories/GHSA-r3r2-35v9-v238"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-33430"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/beeware/briefcase/issues/2759"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/beeware/briefcase-windows-VisualStudio-template/pull/85"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/beeware/briefcase-windows-app-template/pull/86"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/beeware/briefcase"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/briefcase/PYSEC-2026-27.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Briefcase: Windows MSI Installer Privilege Escalation via Insecure Directory Permissions "
}
GHSA-R43Q-FM6X-4JGQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-10-06 18:52 – Updated: 2022-10-07 18:15A vulnerability related to weak permissions was detected in Avaya Aura Application Enablement Services web application, allowing an administrative user to modify accounts leading to execution of arbitrary code as the root user. This issue affects Application Enablement Services versions 8.0.0.0 through 8.1.3.4 and 10.1.0.0 through 10.1.0.1. Versions prior to 8.0.0.0 are end of manufacturing support and were not evaluated.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-2975"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-10-06T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability related to weak permissions was detected in Avaya Aura Application Enablement Services web application, allowing an administrative user to modify accounts leading to execution of arbitrary code as the root user. This issue affects Application Enablement Services versions 8.0.0.0 through 8.1.3.4 and 10.1.0.0 through 10.1.0.1. Versions prior to 8.0.0.0 are end of manufacturing support and were not evaluated.",
"id": "GHSA-r43q-fm6x-4jgq",
"modified": "2022-10-07T18:15:43Z",
"published": "2022-10-06T18:52:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-2975"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://download.avaya.com/css/public/documents/101083688"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R449-4M6G-RP77
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:03 – Updated: 2022-08-06 00:00A flaw was found in Red Hat Satellite, which allows a privileged attacker to read OMAPI secrets through the ISC DHCP of Smart-Proxy. This flaw allows an attacker to gain control of DHCP records from the network. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-14335"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-06-02T12:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A flaw was found in Red Hat Satellite, which allows a privileged attacker to read OMAPI secrets through the ISC DHCP of Smart-Proxy. This flaw allows an attacker to gain control of DHCP records from the network. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability.",
"id": "GHSA-r449-4m6g-rp77",
"modified": "2022-08-06T00:00:48Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:03:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-14335"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2021:1313"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2020-14335"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858302"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-R449-XCXV-P6M2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:01 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:01The Patient Portal of OpenEMR 5.0.2.1 is affected by a incorrect access control system in portal/patient/_machine_config.php. To exploit the vulnerability, an unauthenticated attacker can register an account, bypassing the permission check of this portal's API. Then, the attacker can then manipulate and read data of every registered patient.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-32101"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-05-07T04:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Patient Portal of OpenEMR 5.0.2.1 is affected by a incorrect access control system in portal/patient/_machine_config.php. To exploit the vulnerability, an unauthenticated attacker can register an account, bypassing the permission check of this portal\u0027s API. Then, the attacker can then manipulate and read data of every registered patient.",
"id": "GHSA-r449-xcxv-p6m2",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:01:51Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:01:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-32101"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://blog.sonarsource.com/openemr-5-0-2-1-command-injection-vulnerability"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://community.open-emr.org/t/openemr-5-0-2-patch-5-has-been-released/15431"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://community.sonarsource.com/t/openemr-5-0-2-1-command-injection-vulnerability-puts-health-records-at-risk/33592"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/healthcare-security-openemr-fixes-serious-flaws-that-lead-to-command-execution-in-patient-portal"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-R467-Q4J9-32J6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-05-18 18:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 04:14OpenText Documentum Content Server before 23.2 has a flaw that allows for privilege escalation from a non-privileged Documentum user to root. The software comes prepackaged with a root owned SUID binary dm_secure_writer. The binary has security controls in place preventing creation of a file in a non-owned directory, or as the root user. However, these controls can be carefully bypassed to allow for an arbitrary file write as root.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-31871"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-732"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-05-18T17:15:08Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "OpenText Documentum Content Server before 23.2 has a flaw that allows for privilege escalation from a non-privileged Documentum user to root. The software comes prepackaged with a root owned SUID binary dm_secure_writer. The binary has security controls in place preventing creation of a file in a non-owned directory, or as the root user. However, these controls can be carefully bypassed to allow for an arbitrary file write as root.",
"id": "GHSA-r467-q4j9-32j6",
"modified": "2024-04-04T04:14:21Z",
"published": "2023-05-18T18:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-31871"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/picar0jsu/a8e623639da34f36202ce5e436668de7"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
When using a critical resource such as a configuration file, check to see if the resource has insecure permissions (such as being modifiable by any regular user) [REF-62], and generate an error or even exit the software if there is a possibility that the resource could have been modified by an unauthorized party.
Mitigation
Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully defining distinct user groups, privileges, and/or roles. Map these against data, functionality, and the related resources. Then set the permissions accordingly. This will allow you to maintain more fine-grained control over your resources. [REF-207]
Mitigation MIT-22
Strategy: Sandbox or Jail
- Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
- OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
- This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
- Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation
During program startup, explicitly set the default permissions or umask to the most restrictive setting possible. Also set the appropriate permissions during program installation. This will prevent you from inheriting insecure permissions from any user who installs or runs the program.
Mitigation
For all configuration files, executables, and libraries, make sure that they are only readable and writable by the software's administrator.
Mitigation
Do not suggest insecure configuration changes in documentation, especially if those configurations can extend to resources and other programs that are outside the scope of the application.
Mitigation
Do not assume that a system administrator will manually change the configuration to the settings that are recommended in the software's manual.
Mitigation MIT-37
Strategy: Environment Hardening
Ensure that the software runs properly under the United States Government Configuration Baseline (USGCB) [REF-199] or an equivalent hardening configuration guide, which many organizations use to limit the attack surface and potential risk of deployed software.
Mitigation
When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to disable public access.
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-122: Privilege Abuse
An adversary is able to exploit features of the target that should be reserved for privileged users or administrators but are exposed to use by lower or non-privileged accounts. Access to sensitive information and functionality must be controlled to ensure that only authorized users are able to access these resources.
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-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-180: Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels
An attacker exploits a weakness in the configuration of access controls and is able to bypass the intended protection that these measures guard against and thereby obtain unauthorized access to the system or network. Sensitive functionality should always be protected with access controls. However configuring all but the most trivial access control systems can be very complicated and there are many opportunities for mistakes. If an attacker can learn of incorrectly configured access security settings, they may be able to exploit this in an attack.
CAPEC-206: Signing Malicious Code
The adversary extracts credentials used for code signing from a production environment and then uses these credentials to sign malicious content with the developer's key. Many developers use signing keys to sign code or hashes of code. When users or applications verify the signatures are accurate they are led to believe that the code came from the owner of the signing key and that the code has not been modified since the signature was applied. If the adversary has extracted the signing credentials then they can use those credentials to sign their own code bundles. Users or tools that verify the signatures attached to the code will likely assume the code came from the legitimate developer and install or run the code, effectively allowing the adversary to execute arbitrary code on the victim's computer. This differs from CAPEC-673, because the adversary is performing the code signing.
CAPEC-234: Hijacking a privileged process
An adversary gains control of a process that is assigned elevated privileges in order to execute arbitrary code with those privileges. Some processes are assigned elevated privileges on an operating system, usually through association with a particular user, group, or role. If an attacker can hijack this process, they will be able to assume its level of privilege in order to execute their own code.
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-61: Session Fixation
The attacker induces a client to establish a session with the target software using a session identifier provided by the attacker. Once the user successfully authenticates to the target software, the attacker uses the (now privileged) session identifier in their own transactions. This attack leverages the fact that the target software either relies on client-generated session identifiers or maintains the same session identifiers after privilege elevation.
CAPEC-62: Cross Site Request Forgery
An attacker crafts malicious web links and distributes them (via web pages, email, etc.), typically in a targeted manner, hoping to induce users to click on the link and execute the malicious action against some third-party application. If successful, the action embedded in the malicious link will be processed and accepted by the targeted application with the users' privilege level. This type of attack leverages the persistence and implicit trust placed in user session cookies by many web applications today. In such an architecture, once the user authenticates to an application and a session cookie is created on the user's system, all following transactions for that session are authenticated using that cookie including potential actions initiated by an attacker and simply "riding" the existing session cookie.
CAPEC-642: Replace Binaries
Adversaries know that certain binaries will be regularly executed as part of normal processing. If these binaries are not protected with the appropriate file system permissions, it could be possible to replace them with malware. This malware might be executed at higher system permission levels. A variation of this pattern is to discover self-extracting installation packages that unpack binaries to directories with weak file permissions which it does not clean up appropriately. These binaries can be replaced by malware, which can then be executed.