CWE-282: Improper Ownership Management
The product assigns the wrong ownership, or does not properly verify the ownership, of an object or resource.
Browse cwe weaknesses with official CWE context and Glexia analysis.
Search And Filters
Showing 50 of 969 CWE records · Page 6 of 20.
The product assigns the wrong ownership, or does not properly verify the ownership, of an object or resource.
The product does not properly verify that a critical resource is owned by the proper entity.
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
The product does not properly manage a user within its environment.
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
The product requires authentication, but the product has an alternate path or channel that does not require authentication.
The product performs authentication based on the name of a resource being accessed, or the name of the actor performing the access, but it does not properly check all possible names for that resource or actor.
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
The product uses an IP address for authentication.
This entry has been deprecated because it was a duplicate of CWE-350. All content has been transferred to CWE-350.
The referer field in HTTP requests can be easily modified and, as such, is not a valid means of message integrity checking.
A capture-replay flaw exists when the design of the product makes it possible for a malicious user to sniff network traffic and bypass authentication by replaying it to the server in question to the same effect as the original message (or with minor changes).
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
The product does not follow, or incorrectly follows, the chain of trust for a certificate back to a trusted root certificate.
The product communicates with a host that provides a certificate, but the product does not properly ensure that the certificate is actually associated with that host.
A certificate expiration is not validated or is incorrectly validated.
The product does not check or incorrectly checks the revocation status of a certificate, which may cause it to use a certificate that has been compromised.
The product does not adequately verify the identity of actors at both ends of a communication channel, or does not adequately ensure the integrity of the channel, in a way that allows the channel to be accessed or influenced by an actor that is not an endpoint.
Simple authentication protocols are subject to reflection attacks if a malicious user can use the target machine to impersonate a trusted user.
The authentication scheme or implementation uses key data elements that are assumed to be immutable, but can be controlled or modified by the attacker.
The requirements for the product dictate the use of an established authentication algorithm, but the implementation of the algorithm is incorrect.
The product implements an authentication technique, but it skips a step that weakens the technique.
The authentication algorithm is sound, but the implemented mechanism can be bypassed as the result of a separate weakness that is primary to the authentication error.
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.
The product uses an authentication algorithm that uses a single factor (e.g., a password) in a security context that should require more than one factor.
The use of password systems as the primary means of authentication may be subject to several flaws or shortcomings, each reducing the effectiveness of the mechanism.
The product does not encrypt sensitive or critical information before storage or transmission.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext within a resource that might be accessible to another control sphere.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in a file, or on disk.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in the registry.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in a cookie.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in memory.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext within the GUI.
The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in an executable.
The product transmits sensitive or security-critical data in cleartext in a communication channel that can be sniffed by unauthorized actors.
The product uses a hard-coded, unchangeable cryptographic key.
The product performs a key exchange with an actor without verifying the identity of that actor.
Nonces should be used for the present occasion and only once.
The product uses a cryptographic key or password past its expiration date, which diminishes its safety significantly by increasing the timing window for cracking attacks against that key.
The product does not implement a required step in a cryptographic algorithm, resulting in weaker encryption than advertised by the algorithm.
The product stores or transmits sensitive data using an encryption scheme that is theoretically sound, but is not strong enough for the level of protection required.
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
The product uses an algorithm that produces a digest (output value) that does not meet security expectations for a hash function that allows an adversary to reasonably determine the original input (preimage attack), find another input that can produce the same hash (2nd preimage attack), or find multiple inputs that evaluate to the same hash (birthday attack).
The product generates and uses a predictable initialization Vector (IV) with Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) Mode, which causes algorithms to be susceptible to dictionary attacks when they are encrypted under the same key.
The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers.
The product uses an algorithm or scheme that produces insufficient entropy, leaving patterns or clusters of values that are more likely to occur than others.
The lack of entropy available for, or used by, a Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) can be a stability and security threat.
True random number generators (TRNG) generally have a limited source of entropy and therefore can fail or block.