CWE-862
Allowed-with-ReviewMissing Authorization
Abstraction: Class · Status: Incomplete
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
14839 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-F5M3-4M73-89P9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-06 15:30 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:35Missing Authorization vulnerability in SolaPlugins Sola Support Ticket allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects Sola Support Ticket: from n/a through 3.17.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-25997"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-06-06T13:15:22Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in SolaPlugins Sola Support Ticket allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects Sola Support Ticket: from n/a through 3.17.",
"id": "GHSA-f5m3-4m73-89p9",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:35:39Z",
"published": "2025-06-06T15:30:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-25997"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/sola-support-tickets/vulnerability/wordpress-sola-support-ticket-3-17-arbitrary-content-deletion-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F5Q9-9W7Q-Q2JV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-20 09:31 – Updated: 2026-07-20 18:32The Kirki WordPress plugin before 6.0.12 does not perform any authorisation check on one of its REST routes, allowing unauthenticated users to overwrite the content of arbitrary existing comments and to create pre-approved comments under a spoofed identity, bypassing comment moderation.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12723"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-20T07:16:34Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Kirki WordPress plugin before 6.0.12 does not perform any authorisation check on one of its REST routes, allowing unauthenticated users to overwrite the content of arbitrary existing comments and to create pre-approved comments under a spoofed identity, bypassing comment moderation.",
"id": "GHSA-f5q9-9w7q-q2jv",
"modified": "2026-07-20T18:32:30Z",
"published": "2026-07-20T09:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12723"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/76df2c61-4ba7-4987-9e61-5d02142b3db5"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F5R5-77WF-XX6H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-26 21:32 – Updated: 2024-11-26 21:32An issue has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 8.12 before 17.4.5, 17.5 before 17.5.3, and 17.6 before 17.6.1. This issue allows an attacker with access to a victim's Personal Access Token (PAT) to escalate privileges.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-8114"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-11-26T19:15:31Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 8.12 before 17.4.5, 17.5 before 17.5.3, and 17.6 before 17.6.1. This issue allows an attacker with access to a victim\u0027s Personal Access Token (PAT) to escalate privileges.",
"id": "GHSA-f5r5-77wf-xx6h",
"modified": "2024-11-26T21:32:24Z",
"published": "2024-11-26T21:32:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-8114"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/2649822"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/480494"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F5R8-7H4F-JR9X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:35 – Updated: 2023-08-23 17:55A vulnerability was found in Moodle where users with "Log in as" capability in a course context (typically, course managers) may gain access to some site administration capabilities by "logging in as" a System manager. This affects 3.9 to 3.9.1, 3.8 to 3.8.4, 3.7 to 3.7.7, 3.5 to 3.5.13 and earlier unsupported versions. This is fixed in 3.9.2, 3.8.5, 3.7.8 and 3.5.14.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.9.1"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "moodle/moodle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.9"
},
{
"fixed": "3.9.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.8.4"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "moodle/moodle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.8"
},
{
"fixed": "3.8.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.7.7"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "moodle/moodle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.7"
},
{
"fixed": "3.7.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.5.13"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "moodle/moodle"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.5"
},
{
"fixed": "3.5.14"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-25629"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-284",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-13T22:41:47Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2020-12-08T01:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in Moodle where users with \"Log in as\" capability in a course context (typically, course managers) may gain access to some site administration capabilities by \"logging in as\" a System manager. This affects 3.9 to 3.9.1, 3.8 to 3.8.4, 3.7 to 3.7.7, 3.5 to 3.5.13 and earlier unsupported versions. This is fixed in 3.9.2, 3.8.5, 3.7.8 and 3.5.14.",
"id": "GHSA-f5r8-7h4f-jr9x",
"modified": "2023-08-23T17:55:15Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:35:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-25629"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/moodle/moodle"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=410841"
}
],
"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": "Moodle incorrect access control"
}
GHSA-F5VM-7V68-F9FF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-03 21:31 – Updated: 2026-04-03 21:31Insufficient authentication security controls in the browser-based authentication components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to intercept or hijack authentication sessions due to insufficient protections in the browser-based authentication flows.
To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-35561"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-03T21:17:12Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Insufficient authentication security controls in the browser-based authentication components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to intercept or hijack authentication sessions due to insufficient protections in the browser-based authentication flows.\n\nTo remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0.",
"id": "GHSA-f5vm-7v68-f9ff",
"modified": "2026-04-03T21:31:43Z",
"published": "2026-04-03T21:31:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-35561"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://aws.amazon.com/security/security-bulletins/2026-013-aws"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://docs.aws.amazon.com/athena/latest/ug/odbc-v2-driver-release-notes.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://downloads.athena.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/drivers/ODBC/v2.1.0.0/Linux/AmazonAthenaODBC-2.1.0.0.rpm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://downloads.athena.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/drivers/ODBC/v2.1.0.0/Mac/Intel/AmazonAthenaODBC-2.1.0.0_x86.pkg"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://downloads.athena.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/drivers/ODBC/v2.1.0.0/Mac/arm/AmazonAthenaODBC-2.1.0.0_arm.pkg"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://downloads.athena.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/drivers/ODBC/v2.1.0.0/Windows/AmazonAthenaODBC-2.1.0.0.msi"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/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-F637-W7P2-M7FX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-24 17:41 – Updated: 2026-06-24 17:41Summary
The ValidateArgumentType RPC endpoint in service/internal/api/api.go does not perform any authentication or authorization checks. Unlike all other data-returning API endpoints, it does not call auth.UserFromApiCall or checkDashboardAccess. When AuthRequireGuestsToLogin is enabled (the security-conscious configuration), this endpoint remains accessible to unauthenticated users and can be used as an oracle to enumerate valid action binding IDs and their argument configurations.
Details
Root Cause
The ValidateArgumentType handler at service/internal/api/api.go:726 has no authentication check:
func (api *oliveTinAPI) ValidateArgumentType(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeRequest]) (*connect.Response[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse], error) {
if api.argumentNotFoundForValidation(req.Msg) {
return nil, connect.NewError(connect.CodeNotFound, fmt.Errorf("action or argument not found for binding ID %s", req.Msg.BindingId))
}
err := api.validateArgumentTypeInternal(req.Msg)
desc := ""
if err != nil {
desc = err.Error()
}
return connect.NewResponse(&apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse{
Valid: err == nil,
Description: desc,
}), nil
}
Compare this with adjacent endpoints that DO have auth checks:
// WhoAmI - has auth check
func (api *oliveTinAPI) WhoAmI(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.WhoAmIRequest]) ... {
user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)
if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {
return nil, err
}
...
}
// GetDashboard - has auth check
func (api *oliveTinAPI) GetDashboard(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.GetDashboardRequest]) ... {
user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)
if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {
return nil, err
}
...
}
Oracle Behavior
The endpoint provides different responses based on whether the binding and argument exist:
-
Valid binding + valid argument: Returns
{valid: true/false, description: "..."}(200 OK) -
Valid binding + invalid argument: Returns
CodeNotFounderror -
Invalid binding: Returns
CodeNotFounderror
While the error messages for the last two cases are identical, an attacker who knows a valid binding ID (or can guess one from action title SHA256) can enumerate argument names by observing which ones return 200 OK vs CodeNotFound.
Binding ID Predictability
Binding IDs are SHA256 hashes of action titles (see service/internal/executor/executor_actions.go). Since action titles are typically short, human-readable strings (e.g., "Ping", "Restart Service", "Deploy"), an attacker can precompute hashes of likely titles and test them against this endpoint.
Scope
This finding is only meaningful when AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: true is configured. In the default configuration where guests have full dashboard access, the action information is already visible through the dashboard API.
When AuthRequireGuestsToLogin is true, checkDashboardAccess blocks guest access to other endpoints but NOT to ValidateArgumentType.
PoC
Prerequisites
- OliveTin instance with
AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: trueconfigured
Step 1: Verify other endpoints require auth
Confirm that regular endpoints reject unauthenticated requests:
curl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/GetDashboard \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d "{}"
# Returns: CodePermissionDenied - "guests are not allowed to access the dashboard"
Step 2: Enumerate binding IDs via ValidateArgumentType
Test candidate binding IDs (SHA256 of guessed action titles):
# Test if an action titled "Ping" exists
BINDING_ID=$(echo -n "Ping" | sha256sum | cut -d" " -f1)
curl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/ValidateArgumentType \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d "{\"bindingId\":\"$BINDING_ID\",\"argumentName\":\"test\",\"value\":\"x\",\"type\":\"ascii\"}"
# If action exists: returns CodeNotFound (argument "test" not found for this binding)
# If action does not exist: returns CodeNotFound (same message, but confirms the oracle)
Step 3: Enumerate argument names for a known binding
Once a valid binding ID is known, brute-force argument names:
# Test if argument "target" exists for the Ping action
curl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/ValidateArgumentType \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d "{\"bindingId\":\"$BINDING_ID\",\"argumentName\":\"target\",\"value\":\"test\",\"type\":\"ascii\"}"
# If argument exists: returns {valid: true/false} (200 OK) -- CONFIRMED
# If argument does not exist: returns CodeNotFound error
Impact
-
Information Disclosure: Unauthenticated users can enumerate which actions exist (by testing binding IDs) and which arguments each action accepts (by testing argument names). This reveals the server configuration to unauthorized parties.
-
Reconnaissance for Further Attacks: The enumerated information (action names, argument names, argument types) provides valuable reconnaissance for more targeted attacks such as the
ot_prefix argument injection (see advisory 001) or social engineering. -
Limited Scope: This is only exploitable when
AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: trueis configured. In the default configuration, guests already have full access to the dashboard which exposes the same information.
Recommended Fix
Add authentication and dashboard access checks to the ValidateArgumentType handler, consistent with all other data-returning endpoints:
func (api *oliveTinAPI) ValidateArgumentType(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeRequest]) (*connect.Response[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse], error) {
// Add auth check consistent with other endpoints
user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)
if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {
return nil, err
}
if api.argumentNotFoundForValidation(req.Msg) {
return nil, connect.NewError(connect.CodeNotFound, fmt.Errorf("action or argument not found for binding ID %s", req.Msg.BindingId))
}
err := api.validateArgumentTypeInternal(req.Msg)
desc := ""
if err != nil {
desc = err.Error()
}
return connect.NewResponse(&apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse{
Valid: err == nil,
Description: desc,
}), nil
}
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20260521230847-a3865704c854"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-48709"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-24T17:41:01Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-15T21:17:15Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nThe `ValidateArgumentType` RPC endpoint in `service/internal/api/api.go` does not perform any authentication or authorization checks. Unlike all other data-returning API endpoints, it does not call `auth.UserFromApiCall` or `checkDashboardAccess`. When `AuthRequireGuestsToLogin` is enabled (the security-conscious configuration), this endpoint remains accessible to unauthenticated users and can be used as an oracle to enumerate valid action binding IDs and their argument configurations.\n\n## Details\n\n### Root Cause\n\nThe `ValidateArgumentType` handler at `service/internal/api/api.go:726` has no authentication check:\n\n```go\nfunc (api *oliveTinAPI) ValidateArgumentType(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeRequest]) (*connect.Response[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse], error) {\n if api.argumentNotFoundForValidation(req.Msg) {\n return nil, connect.NewError(connect.CodeNotFound, fmt.Errorf(\"action or argument not found for binding ID %s\", req.Msg.BindingId))\n }\n\n err := api.validateArgumentTypeInternal(req.Msg)\n desc := \"\"\n if err != nil {\n desc = err.Error()\n }\n\n return connect.NewResponse(\u0026apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse{\n Valid: err == nil,\n Description: desc,\n }), nil\n}\n```\n\nCompare this with adjacent endpoints that DO have auth checks:\n\n```go\n// WhoAmI - has auth check\nfunc (api *oliveTinAPI) WhoAmI(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.WhoAmIRequest]) ... {\n user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)\n if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {\n return nil, err\n }\n ...\n}\n\n// GetDashboard - has auth check\nfunc (api *oliveTinAPI) GetDashboard(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.GetDashboardRequest]) ... {\n user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)\n if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {\n return nil, err\n }\n ...\n}\n```\n\n### Oracle Behavior\n\nThe endpoint provides different responses based on whether the binding and argument exist:\n\n- **Valid binding + valid argument**: Returns `{valid: true/false, description: \"...\"}` (200 OK)\n\n- **Valid binding + invalid argument**: Returns `CodeNotFound` error\n\n- **Invalid binding**: Returns `CodeNotFound` error\n\nWhile the error messages for the last two cases are identical, an attacker who knows a valid binding ID (or can guess one from action title SHA256) can enumerate argument names by observing which ones return 200 OK vs CodeNotFound.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n### Binding ID Predictability\n\nBinding IDs are SHA256 hashes of action titles (see `service/internal/executor/executor_actions.go`). Since action titles are typically short, human-readable strings (e.g., \"Ping\", \"Restart Service\", \"Deploy\"), an attacker can precompute hashes of likely titles and test them against this endpoint.\n\n### Scope\nThis finding is only meaningful when `AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: true` is configured. In the default configuration where guests have full dashboard access, the action information is already visible through the dashboard API.\nWhen `AuthRequireGuestsToLogin` is true, `checkDashboardAccess` blocks guest access to other endpoints but NOT to `ValidateArgumentType`.\n\n## PoC\n\n### Prerequisites\n\n- OliveTin instance with `AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: true` configured\n\n### Step 1: Verify other endpoints require auth\n\nConfirm that regular endpoints reject unauthenticated requests:\n\n```bash\ncurl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/GetDashboard \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \"{}\"\n# Returns: CodePermissionDenied - \"guests are not allowed to access the dashboard\"\n```\n\n### Step 2: Enumerate binding IDs via ValidateArgumentType\n\nTest candidate binding IDs (SHA256 of guessed action titles):\n\n```bash\n# Test if an action titled \"Ping\" exists\nBINDING_ID=$(echo -n \"Ping\" | sha256sum | cut -d\" \" -f1)\ncurl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/ValidateArgumentType \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \"{\\\"bindingId\\\":\\\"$BINDING_ID\\\",\\\"argumentName\\\":\\\"test\\\",\\\"value\\\":\\\"x\\\",\\\"type\\\":\\\"ascii\\\"}\"\n# If action exists: returns CodeNotFound (argument \"test\" not found for this binding)\n# If action does not exist: returns CodeNotFound (same message, but confirms the oracle)\n```\n\n### Step 3: Enumerate argument names for a known binding\n\nOnce a valid binding ID is known, brute-force argument names:\n\n```bash\n# Test if argument \"target\" exists for the Ping action\ncurl -s -X POST http://localhost:1337/api/ValidateArgumentType \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \"{\\\"bindingId\\\":\\\"$BINDING_ID\\\",\\\"argumentName\\\":\\\"target\\\",\\\"value\\\":\\\"test\\\",\\\"type\\\":\\\"ascii\\\"}\"\n# If argument exists: returns {valid: true/false} (200 OK) -- CONFIRMED\n# If argument does not exist: returns CodeNotFound error\n```\n\n## Impact\n\n1. **Information Disclosure**: Unauthenticated users can enumerate which actions exist (by testing binding IDs) and which arguments each action accepts (by testing argument names). This reveals the server configuration to unauthorized parties.\n\n2. **Reconnaissance for Further Attacks**: The enumerated information (action names, argument names, argument types) provides valuable reconnaissance for more targeted attacks such as the `ot_` prefix argument injection (see advisory 001) or social engineering.\n\n3. **Limited Scope**: This is only exploitable when `AuthRequireGuestsToLogin: true` is configured. In the default configuration, guests already have full access to the dashboard which exposes the same information.\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nAdd authentication and dashboard access checks to the `ValidateArgumentType` handler, consistent with all other data-returning endpoints:\n\n```go\nfunc (api *oliveTinAPI) ValidateArgumentType(ctx ctx.Context, req *connect.Request[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeRequest]) (*connect.Response[apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse], error) {\n // Add auth check consistent with other endpoints\n user := auth.UserFromApiCall(ctx, req, api.cfg)\n if err := api.checkDashboardAccess(user); err != nil {\n return nil, err\n }\n\n if api.argumentNotFoundForValidation(req.Msg) {\n return nil, connect.NewError(connect.CodeNotFound, fmt.Errorf(\"action or argument not found for binding ID %s\", req.Msg.BindingId))\n }\n\n err := api.validateArgumentTypeInternal(req.Msg)\n desc := \"\"\n if err != nil {\n desc = err.Error()\n }\n\n return connect.NewResponse(\u0026apiv1.ValidateArgumentTypeResponse{\n Valid: err == nil,\n Description: desc,\n }), nil\n}\n```",
"id": "GHSA-f637-w7p2-m7fx",
"modified": "2026-06-24T17:41:01Z",
"published": "2026-06-24T17:41:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin/security/advisories/GHSA-f637-w7p2-m7fx"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-48709"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin/commit/a3865704c854061452a4ab5f6d95de3312698ccd"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OliveTin/OliveTin/releases/tag/3000.13.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "OliveTin: ValidateArgumentType API Endpoint\u0027s Missing Authentication Allows Action and Argument Enumeration"
}
GHSA-F647-638R-HXRW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-19 18:31 – Updated: 2026-02-20 18:31Missing Authorization vulnerability in PublishPress PublishPress Authors publishpress-authors allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects PublishPress Authors: from n/a through <= 4.10.1.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25330"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-19T09:16:17Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in PublishPress PublishPress Authors publishpress-authors allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects PublishPress Authors: from n/a through \u003c= 4.10.1.",
"id": "GHSA-f647-638r-hxrw",
"modified": "2026-02-20T18:31:27Z",
"published": "2026-02-19T18:31:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25330"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/publishpress-authors/vulnerability/wordpress-publishpress-authors-plugin-4-10-1-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F64C-Q58Q-9942
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 09:30 – Updated: 2026-07-01 09:30The Motors – Car Dealership & Classified Listings Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.111. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to mark or unmark any other user's car listing as sold by replaying a valid nonce harvested from their own listing against an arbitrary victim post ID, triggering a site-wide 'Sold' badge on the victim's listing and silently stripping its special_car featured post meta as a side effect. Exploitation requires the attacker to hold an active listing of their own (obtainable by a Subscriber via the plugin's add-listing form) in order to harvest a valid nonce for the 'stm_mark_as_sold_car' action, which can then be replayed against any other listing's post ID.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12435"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-01T08:16:21Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Motors \u2013 Car Dealership \u0026 Classified Listings Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.111. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to mark or unmark any other user\u0027s car listing as sold by replaying a valid nonce harvested from their own listing against an arbitrary victim post ID, triggering a site-wide \u0027Sold\u0027 badge on the victim\u0027s listing and silently stripping its special_car featured post meta as a side effect. Exploitation requires the attacker to hold an active listing of their own (obtainable by a Subscriber via the plugin\u0027s add-listing form) in order to harvest a valid nonce for the \u0027stm_mark_as_sold_car\u0027 action, which can then be replayed against any other listing\u0027s post ID.",
"id": "GHSA-f64c-q58q-9942",
"modified": "2026-07-01T09:30:25Z",
"published": "2026-07-01T09:30:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12435"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.108/includes/vehicle_functions.php#L2400"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.108/includes/vehicle_functions.php#L2402"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.108/templates/listing-cars/listing-list-owner-actions.php#L74"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.110/includes/vehicle_functions.php#L2400"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.110/includes/vehicle_functions.php#L2402"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/motors-car-dealership-classified-listings/tags/1.4.110/templates/listing-cars/listing-list-owner-actions.php#L74"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026old=3577332%40motors-car-dealership-classified-listings\u0026new=3577332%40motors-car-dealership-classified-listings\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/5238c344-d685-4eab-822c-d3c1050cc982?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F653-W82J-53XF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-04 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:34Missing Authorization vulnerability in shiptrack Booking Calendar and Notification allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Booking Calendar and Notification: from n/a through 4.0.3.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-31381"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-04T14:15:22Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in shiptrack Booking Calendar and Notification allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Booking Calendar and Notification: from n/a through 4.0.3.",
"id": "GHSA-f653-w82j-53xf",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:34:28Z",
"published": "2025-04-04T15:31:17Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-31381"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/booking-calendar-and-notification/vulnerability/wordpress-booking-calendar-and-notification-plugin-4-0-3-broken-authentication-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-F655-743R-35CR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-09 09:30 – Updated: 2024-06-09 09:30Missing Authorization vulnerability in Mr.Ebabi New Order Notification for Woocommerce.This issue affects New Order Notification for Woocommerce: from n/a through 2.0.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-31098"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-06-09T09:15:11Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Missing Authorization vulnerability in Mr.Ebabi New Order Notification for Woocommerce.This issue affects New Order Notification for Woocommerce: from n/a through 2.0.2.",
"id": "GHSA-f655-743r-35cr",
"modified": "2024-06-09T09:30:34Z",
"published": "2024-06-09T09:30:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-31098"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/new-order-notification-for-woocommerce/wordpress-new-order-notification-for-woocommerce-plugin-2-0-2-broken-access-control-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
- 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) [REF-229] 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.
Mitigation
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied 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 [REF-7].
Mitigation MIT-4.4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- 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].
Mitigation
- 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.
Mitigation
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.
CAPEC-665: Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws
An adversary leverages a firmware weakness within the Thunderbolt protocol, on a computing device to manipulate Thunderbolt controller firmware in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the implementation of authorization and verification schemes within Thunderbolt protection mechanisms. Upon gaining physical access to a target device, the adversary conducts high-level firmware manipulation of the victim Thunderbolt controller SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) flash, through the use of a SPI Programing device and an external Thunderbolt device, typically as the target device is booting up. If successful, this allows the adversary to modify memory, subvert authentication mechanisms, spoof identities and content, and extract data and memory from the target device. Currently 7 major vulnerabilities exist within Thunderbolt protocol with 9 attack vectors as noted in the Execution Flow.