# Improper Access Control (CWE-284)

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.

**Stack:** Go

- Prevalence: High Frequently exploited
- Impact: High 3 high-severity rules
- Prevention: Documented 4 fix examples

**OWASP:** Broken Access Control (A01:2021-Broken Access Control) - #1

## Description

Access control involves determining which subjects can access which objects. When access control is implemented incorrectly, it can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data or functionality.

## Prevention

Prevention strategies for Improper Access Control based on 1 Shoulder detection rules.

### Go

Validate tool inputs against strict schemas and use an allowlist for permitted tools

## Warning Signs

- [HIGH] Insecure plugin implementation: ...
- [HIGH] insecure plugin/function calling implementations in AI/LLM systems without proper validation

## Consequences

- Read Application Data
- Modify Application Data
- Execute Unauthorized Code
- Gain Privileges

## Mitigations

- Implement proper access control checks on all resources
- Use the principle of least privilege
- Enforce access controls server-side, not just in the UI

## Detection

- Total rules: 4
- Languages: go, javascript, typescript, kubernetes, yaml, python

## Rules by Language

### Go (1 rules)

- **LLM Insecure Plugin Design** [HIGH]: Detects insecure plugin/function calling implementations in AI/LLM systems without proper validation.
  - Remediation: Validate tool inputs against strict schemas and use an allowlist for permitted tools.

```go
if _, ok := toolRegistry[toolCall.Name]; !ok {
    return errors.New("unknown tool")
}
```

Learn more: https://shoulder.dev/learn/go/cwe-284/llm-insecure-plugin