A01-2021 Broken Access Control moves up from the fifth position; 94% of applications were tested for some form of broken access control. The 34 Common Weakness Enumerations (CWEs) mapped to Broken Access Control had more occurrences in applications than any other category.
https://owasp.org/Top10/A01_2021-Broken_Access_Control
Introduction
How to use the OWASP Top 10 as a standard
How to start an AppSec program with the OWASP Top 10
About OWASP
A06 Vulnerable and Outdated Components
A07 Identification and Authentication Failures
A08 Software and Data Integrity Failures
A09 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
A10 Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
Next Steps
Factors
Overview
Description
How to Prevent
Example Attack Scenarios
References
A01-2021 – Broken Access Control
Factors
CWEs Mapped, Max Incidence Rate, Avg Incidence Rate, Avg Weighted Exploit, Avg Weighted Impact, Max Coverage, Avg Coverage, Total Occurrences Total CVEs
34 55.97% 3.81% 6.92 5.93 94.55% 47.72% 318,487 19,013
Moving up from the fifth position, 94% of applications were tested for some form of broken access control with the average incidence rate of 3.81%, and has the most occurrences in the contributed dataset with over 318k. Notable Common Weakness Enumerations (CWEs) included are CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor, CWE-201 Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data, and CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery.
Description
Access control enforces policy such that users cannot act outside of their intended permissions. Failures typically lead to unauthorized information disclosure, modification, or destruction of all data or performing a business function outside the user's limits. Common access control vulnerabilities include:
Violation of the principle of least privilege or deny by default, where access should only be granted for particular capabilities, roles, or users, but is available to anyone.
Bypassing access control checks by modifying the URL (parameter tampering or force browsing), internal application state, or the HTML page, or by using an attack tool modifying API requests.
Permitting viewing or editing someone else's account, by providing its unique identifier (insecure direct object references)
Accessing API with missing access controls for POST, PUT and DELETE.
Elevation of privilege. Acting as a user without being logged in or acting as an admin when logged in as a user.
Metadata manipulation, such as replaying or tampering with a JSON Web Token (JWT) access control token, or a cookie or hidden field manipulated to elevate privileges or abusing JWT invalidation.
CORS misconfiguration allows API access from unauthorized/untrusted origins.
Force browsing to authenticated pages as an unauthenticated user or to privileged pages as a standard user.
How to Prevent
Access control is only effective in trusted server-side code or server-less API, where the attacker cannot modify the access control check or metadata.
Except for public resources, deny by default.
Implement access control mechanisms once and re-use them throughout the application, including minimizing Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) usage.
Model access controls should enforce record ownership rather than accepting that the user can create, read, update, or delete any record.
Unique application business limit requirements should be enforced by domain models.
Disable web server directory listing and ensure file metadata (e.g., .git) and backup files are not present within web roots.
Log access control failures, alert admins when appropriate (e.g., repeated failures).
Rate limit API and controller access to minimize the harm from automated attack tooling.
Stateful session identifiers should be invalidated on the server after logout. Stateless JWT tokens should rather be short-lived so that the window of opportunity for an attacker is minimized. For longer lived JWTs it's highly recommended to follow the OAuth standards to revoke access.
Developers and QA staff should include functional access control unit and integration tests.
Example Attack Scenarios
Scenario #1: The application uses unverified data in a SQL call that is accessing account information:
pstmt.setString(1, request.getParameter("acct"));
ResultSet results = pstmt.executeQuery( );
An attacker simply modifies the browser's 'acct' parameter to send whatever account number they want. If not correctly verified, the attacker can access any user's account.
https://example.com/app/accountInfo?acct=notmyacct
Scenario #2: An attacker simply forces browses to target URLs. Admin rights are required for access to the admin page.
https://example.com/app/getappInfo
https://example.com/app/admin_getappInfo
If an unauthenticated user can access either page, it's a flaw. If a non-admin can access the admin page, this is a flaw.
© Copyright 2021 - OWASP Top 10 team - This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.