CWE WEAKNESSES  /  CWE-863

CWE-863

Incorrect Authorization

What it is

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

Impact

Mitigations

• [Architecture and Design]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
• [Architecture and Design] 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
• [Architecture and Design]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].
• [Architecture and Design]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 reque
• [System Configuration, Installation] 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.

Real-world CVE examples

• CVE-2025-24839 — collaboration platform allows attacker to access an AI bot by using a plugin to set a critical property
• CVE-2025-32796 — LLM application development platform allows non-admin users to enable or disable apps using certain API endpoints
• CVE-2021-39155 — Chain: A microservice integration and management platform compares the hostname in the HTTP Host header in a case-sensitive way (CWE-178, CWE-1289), allowing by
• CVE-2019-15900 — Chain: sscanf() call is used to check if a username and group exists, but the return value of sscanf() call is not checked (CWE-252), causing an uninitialized v
• CVE-2009-2213 — Gateway uses default "Allow" configuration for its authorization settings.
• CVE-2009-0034 — Chain: product does not properly interpret a configuration option for a system group, allowing users to gain privileges.
• CVE-2008-6123 — Chain: SNMP product does not properly parse a configuration option for which hosts are allowed to connect, allowing unauthorized IP addresses to connect.
• CVE-2008-7109 — Chain: reliance on client-side security (CWE-602) allows attackers to bypass authorization using a custom client.
• CVE-2008-3424 — Chain: product does not properly handle wildcards in an authorization policy list, allowing unintended access.
• CVE-2008-4577 — ACL-based protection mechanism treats negative access rights as if they are positive, allowing bypass of intended restrictions.
• CVE-2006-6679 — Product relies on the X-Forwarded-For HTTP header for authorization, allowing unintended access by spoofing the header.
• CVE-2005-2801 — Chain: file-system code performs an incorrect comparison (CWE-697), preventing default ACLs from being properly applied.

Related weaknesses

Source: MITRE CWE. View on cwe.mitre.org →