What CVEs are caused by CWE-566?

7 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-566, including CVE-2025-9953, CVE-2014-0808, CVE-2026-21886.

Is CWE-566 actively exploited?

7 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-566; none are currently in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws.

RadicalNotion.AI

Log in Start free

Variant weakness

Incomplete

CWE-566: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled SQL Primary Key

The product uses a database table that includes records that should not be accessible to an actor, but it executes a SQL statement with a primary key that can be controlled by that actor.

Last updated May 1, 2026

7

Recorded CVEs

With this primary weakness

0

KEVs

In the CISA KEV catalog

Not rated

Likelihood of exploit

Per MITRE

Variant

Abstraction

MITRE classification

Overview

When a user can set a primary key to any value, then the user can modify the key to point to unauthorized records. Database access control errors occur when: Data enters a program from an untrusted source. The data is used to specify the value of a primary key in a SQL query. The untrusted source does not have the permissions to be able to access all rows in the associated table.

Real-world CVEs

7 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-566 (Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled SQL Primary Key). The highest-severity and most recent are shown first. 2 new CWE-566 CVEs have been recorded so far in 2026 (3 in 2025).

Common consequences

What can happen when CWE-566 is exploited.

Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, Bypass Protection Mechanism

Affects: Confidentiality, Integrity, Access Control

How it happens

When it is introduced

Typically introduced during these phases of the software lifecycle.

Architecture and Design

Implementation

Applies to

Languages

SQL (Often)

Technologies

Database Server (Often)

How to prevent it

Practical mitigations for CWE-566, grouped by where in the lifecycle they apply.

Implementation

Assume all input is malicious. Use a standard input validation mechanism to validate all input for length, type, syntax, and business rules before accepting the data. Use an "accept known good" validation strategy.

Implementation

Use a parameterized query AND make sure that the accepted values conform to the business rules. Construct your SQL statement accordingly.

How to detect it

Automated Static Analysis

Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)

Effectiveness: High

Code examples

Illustrative examples from MITRE showing how the weakness appears in code.

The following code uses a parameterized statement, which escapes metacharacters and prevents SQL injection vulnerabilities, to construct and execute a SQL query that searches for an invoice matching the specified identifier [1]. The identifier is selected from a list of all invoices associated with the current authenticated user.

The problem is that the developer has not considered all of the possible values of id. Although the interface generates a list of invoice identifiers that belong to the current user, an attacker can bypass this interface to request any desired invoice. Because the code in this example does not check to ensure that the user has permission to access the requested invoice, it will display any invoice, even if it does not belong to the current user.

Terminology & mappings

Mapped taxonomies

Software Fault Patterns: Tainted input to variable (SFP25)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about CWE-566.

What is CWE-566?: The product uses a database table that includes records that should not be accessible to an actor, but it executes a SQL statement with a primary key that can be controlled by that actor.
What CVEs are caused by CWE-566?: 7 recorded CVEs are attributed to CWE-566, including CVE-2025-9953, CVE-2014-0808, CVE-2026-21886.
How do you prevent CWE-566?: Assume all input is malicious. Use a standard input validation mechanism to validate all input for length, type, syntax, and business rules before accepting the data. Use an "accept known good" validation strategy.
How is CWE-566 detected?: Automated Static Analysis: Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)
What are the consequences of CWE-566?: Exploiting CWE-566 can lead to: Read Application Data, Modify Application Data, Bypass Protection Mechanism.
Is CWE-566 actively exploited?: 7 recorded CVEs are caused by CWE-566; none are currently in CISA's KEV catalog of actively exploited flaws.

References

Weakness data is sourced from the MITRE CWE catalog (v4.20). CVE associations are aggregated and kept current by RadicalNotion.AI.

Stay ahead of CWE-566

Get alerted the moment a new CWE-566 vulnerability affects your stack, with AI-written analysis, severity context, and remediation guidance.

Start free See pricing

Overview

Real-world CVEs

Common consequences

How it happens

When it is introduced

Applies to

How to prevent it

How to detect it

Automated Static Analysis

Code examples

Related weaknesses

Parent

Terminology & mappings

Mapped taxonomies

Frequently asked questions

References

Stay ahead of CWE-566