CWE-732: Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource
The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.
How it's found
Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource describes a general pattern rather than a single fixed bug. Testers use a mix of static analysis and manual code review to find where a target's code matches this pattern, then confirm exploitability by hand.
When a resource is given a permission setting that provides access to a wider range of actors than required, it could lead to the exposure of sensitive information, or the modification of that resource by unintended parties. This is especially dangerous when the resource is related to program configuration, execution, or sensitive user data. For example, consider a misconfigured storage account for the cloud that can be read or written by a public or anonymous user.
Vulnerable vs. safe
az storage account update --name <storage-account> --resource-group <resource-group> --allow-blob-public-access trueaz storage account update --name <storage-account> --resource-group <resource-group> --allow-blob-public-access falseConsequences
- Read Application Data, Read Files or Directories: An attacker may be able to read sensitive information from the associated resource, such as credentials or configuration information stored in a file.
- Gain Privileges or Assume Identity: An attacker may be able to modify critical properties of the associated resource to gain privileges, such as replacing a world-writable executable with a Trojan horse.
- Modify Application Data, Other: An attacker may be able to destroy or corrupt critical data in the associated resource, such as deletion of records from a database.
Mitigations
- Implementation: When using a critical resource such as a configuration file, check to see if the resource has insecure permissions (such as being modifiable by any regular user) [REF-62], and generate an error or even exit the software if there is a possibility that the resource could have been modified by an unauthorized party.
- Architecture and Design: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully defining distinct user groups, privileges, and/or roles. Map these against data, functionality, and the related resources. Then set the permissions accordingly. This will allow you to maintain more fine-grained control over your resources. [REF-207]
- Architecture and Design/Operation: Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software. OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
- Implementation/Installation: During program startup, explicitly set the default permissions or umask to the most restrictive setting possible. Also set the appropriate permissions during program installation. This will prevent you from inheriting insecure permissions from any user who installs or runs the program.
- System Configuration: For all configuration files, executables, and libraries, make sure that they are only readable and writable by the software's administrator.
- Documentation: Do not suggest insecure configuration changes in documentation, especially if those configurations can extend to resources and other programs that are outside the scope of the application.
- Installation: Do not assume that a system administrator will manually change the configuration to the settings that are recommended in the software's manual.
- Operation/System Configuration: Ensure that the software runs properly under the United States Government Configuration Baseline (USGCB) [REF-199] or an equivalent hardening configuration guide, which many organizations use to limit the attack surface and potential risk of deployed software.
- Implementation/System Configuration/Operation: When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to disable public access.
How TurboPentest tests for this (white-box)
This weakness (Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource) is caught by white-box static analysis when you connect a GitHub repo: IntegSec's Opengrep SAST rule pack carries 1 rule for it, flagging the issue directly in your source code as part of the pentest.
Frequently asked questions
What is CWE-732?
The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.
How do you find Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource?
Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource describes a general pattern rather than a single fixed bug. Testers use a mix of static analysis and manual code review to find where a target's code matches this pattern, then confirm exploitability by hand.
What is the impact of CWE-732?
Read Application Data, Read Files or Directories: An attacker may be able to read sensitive information from the associated resource, such as credentials or configuration information stored in a file. Gain Privileges or Assume Identity: An attacker may be able to modify critical properties of the associated resource to gain privileges, such as replacing a world-writable executable with a Trojan horse. Modify Application Data, Other: An attacker may be able to destroy or corrupt critical data in the associated resource, such as deletion of records from a database.
Does TurboPentest test for Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource?
This weakness (Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource) is caught by white-box static analysis when you connect a GitHub repo: IntegSec's Opengrep SAST rule pack carries 1 rule for it, flagging the issue directly in your source code as part of the pentest.
Related CWEs
Written and reviewed by
Michel Chamberland - Founder & CEO, IntegSec
CISSP, OSCP, OSCE, CEH, GIAC, CCSK · 20+ years in offensive security
Michel has spent 20+ years on offensive security teams including IBM X-Force Red and Trustwave SpiderLabs, leading penetration tests, red team engagements, and breach response for Fortune 500 customers. He is the founder of IntegSec and the architect of TurboPentest.
Find these issues before an attacker does
TurboPentest runs an agentic AI pentest against your target and reports findings with proof, from $99 per target.
Start a pentest