The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

What CVEs are caused by CWE-285?

1,143 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-285, including CVE-2021-28799, CVE-2026-57983, CVE-2026-0072. 1 are listed in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.

Is CWE-285 part of the OWASP Top 10?

CWE-285 maps to OWASP Top Ten 2007: Failure to Restrict URL Access (A10) in the OWASP security taxonomy.

What are the consequences of CWE-285?

Exploiting CWE-285 can lead to: Read Application Data, Read Files or Directories, Modify Application Data, Modify Files or Directories, Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands.

Is CWE-285 actively exploited?

Yes. 1 CWE-285 vulnerabilities are in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws, out of 1,143 recorded CVEs.

CWE-285: Improper Authorization (AuthZ)

Q: How is CWE-285 detected?

Automated Static Analysis: Automated static analysis is useful for detecting commonly-used idioms for authorization. A tool may be able to analyze related configuration files, such as .htaccess in Apache web servers, or detect the usage of commonly-used authorization libraries.

How to prevent it

Practical mitigations for CWE-285, grouped by where in the lifecycle they apply.

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) 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.

Architecture and Design

Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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.

Architecture and Design

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].

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 requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.

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.

How to detect it

Automated Static Analysis

Automated static analysis is useful for detecting commonly-used idioms for authorization. A tool may be able to analyze related configuration files, such as .htaccess in Apache web servers, or detect the usage of commonly-used authorization libraries.

Generally, automated static analysis tools have difficulty detecting custom authorization schemes. In addition, the software's design may include some functionality that is accessible to any user and does not require an authorization check; an automated technique that detects the absence of authorization may report false positives.

Effectiveness: Limited

Automated Dynamic Analysis

Automated dynamic analysis may find many or all possible interfaces that do not require authorization, but manual analysis is required to determine if the lack of authorization violates business logic

Manual Analysis

This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.

Specifically, manual static analysis is useful for evaluating the correctness of custom authorization mechanisms.

Effectiveness: Moderate