CWE-288 Base Incompleto

Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel

This vulnerability occurs when a system has a primary login requirement, but attackers can find an unprotected backdoor or alternative route that completely bypasses those checks.

Definição

What is CWE-288?

This vulnerability occurs when a system has a primary login requirement, but attackers can find an unprotected backdoor or alternative route that completely bypasses those checks.
Think of it like a building with a guarded front door but an unlocked side window. The main application flow correctly validates user credentials, but developers might overlook a secondary API endpoint, a hidden administrative page, a debug interface, or a direct file path that doesn't enforce the same authentication rules. Attackers discover these alternate channels through reconnaissance, fuzzing, or analyzing application structure, allowing them to access restricted functions or data without ever logging in. This often happens during development when temporary access points are created for testing and never removed, or when different system components have inconsistent security policies. To prevent it, you must ensure every single entry point into protected functionality—including APIs, files, and hidden directories—enforces the same robust authentication checks. Regular security audits should map all access paths and verify none provide a secret bypass to your core security gate.
Vulnerability Diagram CWE-288
Auth Bypass via Alternate Path /login password required /internal/api no auth (legacy) Same backend no second check Sensitive data accessible Hardened front door, side door wide open.
Impacto no mundo real

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-288

  • Router allows remote attackers to read system logs without authentication by directly connecting to the login screen and typing certain control characters.

  • Attackers with physical access to the machine may bypass the password prompt by pressing the ESC (Escape) key.

  • OS allows local attackers to bypass the password protection of idled sessions via the programmer's switch or CMD-PWR keyboard sequence, which brings up a debugger that the attacker can use to disable the lock.

  • Direct request of installation file allows attacker to create administrator accounts.

  • Attackers may gain additional privileges by directly requesting the web management URL.

  • Bypass authentication via direct request to named pipe.

  • User can avoid lockouts by using an API instead of the GUI to conduct brute force password guessing.

Como os atacantes a exploram

Trajeto do atacante passo a passo

  1. 1

    Identificar um caminho de código que trata input não confiável sem validação.

  2. 2

    Criar um payload que explora o comportamento inseguro — injeção, traversal, overflow ou abuso de lógica.

  3. 3

    Entregar o payload através de um pedido normal e observar a reação da aplicação.

  4. 4

    Iterar até que a resposta exponha dados, execute código do atacante ou escale privilégios.

Exemplo de código vulnerável

Vulnerable Verilog

Vulnerável Verilog
assign addr_auth = (address == 32'hF00) ? 1: 0;
Exemplo de código seguro

Secure Verilog

The bugged line of code is repeated in the Bad example above. Weakness arises from the fact that the SECURE_ME register can be modified by writing to the shadow register COPY_OF_SECURE_ME, the address of COPY_OF_SECURE_ME should also be included in the check. That buggy line of code should instead be replaced as shown in the Good Code Snippet below.

Seguro Verilog
assign addr_auth = (address == 32'hF00 || address == 32'h800F00) ? 1: 0;
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Lista de verificação de prevenção

How to prevent CWE-288

  • Architecture and Design Funnel all access through a single choke point to simplify how users can access a resource. For every access, perform a check to determine if the user has permissions to access the resource.
Sinais de deteção

How to detect CWE-288

SAST High

Executar análise estática (SAST) na base de código à procura do padrão inseguro no fluxo de dados.

DAST Moderate

Executar testes dinâmicos de segurança de aplicações (DAST) contra o endpoint em execução.

Runtime Moderate

Monitorizar os registos em tempo de execução para traços de exceção invulgares, input malformado ou tentativas de contornar a autorização.

Code review Moderate

Revisão de código: sinalizar qualquer novo código que trate input desta superfície sem usar os ajudantes validados do framework.

CWE-288

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.

Perguntas frequentes

Frequently asked questions

O que é o CWE-288?

This vulnerability occurs when a system has a primary login requirement, but attackers can find an unprotected backdoor or alternative route that completely bypasses those checks.

Qual a gravidade do CWE-288?

A MITRE não publicou uma classificação de probabilidade de exploração para esta fraqueza. Trate-a como impacto médio até o seu modelo de ameaças provar o contrário.

Que linguagens ou plataformas são afetadas pelo CWE-288?

A MITRE não especificou as plataformas afetadas por este CWE — pode aplicar-se à maioria das stacks de aplicações.

Como posso prevenir o CWE-288?

Funnel all access through a single choke point to simplify how users can access a resource. For every access, perform a check to determine if the user has permissions to access the resource.

Como é que o Plexicus deteta e corrige o CWE-288?

O motor SAST do Plexicus correlaciona a assinatura de fluxo de dados do CWE-288 em cada commit. Quando é encontrada uma correspondência, o nosso agente Codex Remedium abre um PR de correção com o código corrigido, testes e um resumo de uma linha para o revisor.

Onde posso saber mais sobre o CWE-288?

A MITRE publica a definição canónica em https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/288.html. Pode também consultar a documentação da OWASP e do NIST para orientações adjacentes.

Pronto para validar o que importa?

Pronto para validar o que importa.

O Plexicus é Proof-Driven AppSec: achados validados, compreensão contextual e remediação revisada — ancorada em evidência, escopada com você.

Qualificação

Verifique se o AI Swarm Pentest se adequa ao seu ambiente.

Partilhe o contexto mínimo. Vamos rever o escopo e indicar o próximo passo comercial.

Antes de enviar — verifique se se encaixa

0 / 280

Sem compromisso. Se não se encaixa, dizemos.

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)
Ronda privada Para investidores