CWE-293 Variant Draft High likelihood

Using Referer Field for Authentication

This vulnerability occurs when a web application uses the HTTP Referer header as a sole or primary method for authentication or authorization decisions. Since this header is entirely controlled by…

Definition

What is CWE-293?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application uses the HTTP Referer header as a sole or primary method for authentication or authorization decisions. Since this header is entirely controlled by the user's browser or client and can be easily forged, it provides no reliable security.
The HTTP Referer header is designed to tell a server which page a user came from, but it was never intended for security. Treating it as a trusted credential is like using a 'recommended by a friend' note for building access—anyone can write it. Developers might implement this check to prevent cross-site request forgery (CSRF) or to restrict direct URL access, but because attackers can fully manipulate the header with simple tools like a proxy or browser extension, this defense is completely ineffective. To properly secure authentication and authorization, always use established server-side mechanisms like session tokens, CSRF tokens, or standard authentication protocols (OAuth, SAML). These methods rely on secrets or cryptographic signatures that the client cannot easily forge. Relying on the Referer header creates a false sense of security and leaves critical application functions exposed to trivial bypass attacks.
Auswirkungen in der Praxis

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-293

Bisher sind in MITREs Katalog keine öffentlichen CVE-Referenzen mit dieser CWE verknüpft.

Wie Angreifer es ausnutzen

Angreiferpfad Schritt für Schritt

  1. 1

    Identifiziere einen Codepfad, der nicht vertrauenswürdige Eingaben ohne Validierung verarbeitet.

  2. 2

    Erzeuge eine Payload, die das unsichere Verhalten auslöst — Injection, Traversal, Overflow oder Logik-Missbrauch.

  3. 3

    Liefere die Payload über einen normalen Request aus und beobachte die Reaktion der Anwendung.

  4. 4

    Iteriere, bis die Antwort Daten preisgibt, Angreifer-Code ausführt oder Berechtigungen eskaliert.

Verwundbares Codebeispiel

Vulnerable C++

The following code samples check a packet's referer in order to decide whether or not an inbound request is from a trusted host.

Verwundbar C++
String trustedReferer = "http://www.example.com/"
  while(true){
  	n = read(newsock, buffer, BUFSIZE);
  	requestPacket = processPacket(buffer, n);
  	if (requestPacket.referer == trustedReferer){
  		openNewSecureSession(requestPacket);
  	}
  }
Sicheres Codebeispiel

Secure pseudo

Sicher pseudo
// Validate, sanitize, or use a safe API before reaching the sink.
function handleRequest(input) {
  const safe = validateAndEscape(input);
  return executeWithGuards(safe);
}
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Präventions-Checkliste

How to prevent CWE-293

  • Architecture and Design In order to usefully check if a given action is authorized, some means of strong authentication and method protection must be used. Use other means of authorization that cannot be simply spoofed. Possibilities include a username/password or certificate.
Erkennungssignale

How to detect CWE-293

Automated Static Analysis High

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.)

CWE-293

Don't catalog this weakness. Prove it's reachable.

Plexicus turns CWE catalogs into evidence: every CWE-pattern is matched against your real code graph, reach is proven on a sandbox clone, and verified findings ship as reviewed PRs.

Häufig gestellte Fragen

Frequently asked questions

Was ist CWE-293?

This vulnerability occurs when a web application uses the HTTP Referer header as a sole or primary method for authentication or authorization decisions. Since this header is entirely controlled by the user's browser or client and can be easily forged, it provides no reliable security.

Wie gravierend ist CWE-293?

MITRE stuft die Exploit-Wahrscheinlichkeit als hoch ein — diese Schwachstelle wird aktiv in freier Wildbahn ausgenutzt und sollte priorisiert behoben werden.

Welche Sprachen oder Plattformen sind von CWE-293 betroffen?

MITRE hat für diese CWE keine betroffenen Plattformen spezifiziert — sie kann in den meisten Anwendungs-Stacks auftreten.

Wie kann ich CWE-293 verhindern?

In order to usefully check if a given action is authorized, some means of strong authentication and method protection must be used. Use other means of authorization that cannot be simply spoofed. Possibilities include a username/password or certificate.

Wie erkennt und behebt Plexicus CWE-293?

Die SAST-Engine von Plexicus erkennt die Datenfluss-Signatur von CWE-293 bei jedem Commit. Bei einem Treffer öffnet unser Codex-Remedium-Agent einen Fix-PR mit korrigiertem Code, Tests und einer einzeiligen Zusammenfassung für den Reviewer.

Wo erfahre ich mehr über CWE-293?

MITRE veröffentlicht die kanonische Definition unter https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/293.html. Für ergänzende Hinweise kannst du auch die OWASP- und NIST-Dokumentation heranziehen.

Bereit, das Wesentliche zu validieren?

Bereit zu validieren, was zählt.

Plexicus ist Proof-Driven AppSec: validierte Funde, kontextuelles Verständnis und geprüfte Remediation — in Evidenz verankert, mit Ihnen gescoped.

Qualifizierung

Prüfen Sie, ob AI Swarm Pentest zu Ihrer Umgebung passt.

Teilen Sie den wichtigsten Kontext. Wir prüfen den Umfang und nennen den nächsten kommerziellen Schritt.

Vor dem Absenden — prüfen Sie, ob Sie passen

0 / 280

Keine Verpflichtung. Wenn Sie nicht passen, sagen wir es Ihnen.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorized target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)
Private Runde Für Investoren