← Back
CWE-308

16 CVEs • Abstraction: Base • Likelihood of Exploit: High

Use of Single-factor Authentication

The use of single-factor authentication can lead to unnecessary risk of compromise when compared with the benefits of a dual-factor authentication scheme.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (16)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
-
-
Sep 8, 2026
Sep 8, 2026
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
SAP NetWeaver Message Server does not sufficiently validate the authenticity of internal application server components during registration. An unauthenticated attacker with network access to the affected service could ex...Show more
SAP NetWeaver Message Server does not sufficiently validate the authenticity of internal application server components during registration. An unauthenticated attacker with network access to the affected service could exploit this weakness to register an unauthorized component and potentially perform unauthorized actions within the application environment, resulting in a high impact on the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected system.Show less
-
-
Sep 4, 2026
Sep 4, 2026
7.1 HIGH· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
phpMyFAQ before 4.1.8 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in its two-factor authentication (TOTP) disable functionality. The removeTwofactorConfig() handler (reachable via POST /api/user/remove-twofactor) ver...Show more
phpMyFAQ before 4.1.8 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in its two-factor authentication (TOTP) disable functionality. The removeTwofactorConfig() handler (reachable via POST /api/user/remove-twofactor) verifies only that the user is logged in and that a valid CSRF token is supplied, then disables TOTP without requiring password re-entry or a current TOTP code. The same downgrade is also reachable inline via PUT /api/user/data/update, which accepts a plain twofactor_enabled form field under the same session+CSRF-only guard. An attacker who has hijacked a user's session can silently strip two-factor protection from any account, including administrator accounts, after which password-only authentication succeeds.Show less
1Open Emr
1Openemr
Sep 1, 2026
Aug 3, 2026
8.6 HIGH· v4
8.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
OpenEMR through 8.2.0 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows attackers with valid credentials to circumvent multi-factor authentication by exploiting the exposed OAuth2 password grant flow through an...Show more
OpenEMR through 8.2.0 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows attackers with valid credentials to circumvent multi-factor authentication by exploiting the exposed OAuth2 password grant flow through an unauthenticated client registration endpoint. Attackers can register an OAuth2 client via the unauthenticated registration endpoint and use the password grant to exchange credentials for an API access token, bypassing the normal web interface authentication and any enforced multi-factor authentication controls.Show less
-
-
Jul 27, 2026
Jul 23, 2026
N/A· v4
9.1 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Logto does not enforce locally configured MFA during SSO authentication, allowing users to bypass second-factor requirements and grants unauthorized access.
1Webmin
1Webmin
Aug 11, 2026
Jun 18, 2026
6.9 MEDIUM· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Webmin accepts basic authentication without session cookies when an attacker provides the 'User-Agent: webmin' header, allowing bypass of additional MFA requirements. Fixed in 2.640.
-
-
Jun 23, 2026
Jun 17, 2026
5.9 MEDIUM· v4
N/A· v3
N/A· v2
vantage6 is an open-source infrastructure for privacy preserving analysis. Prior to version 5.0.0, if an attacker hacks into a vantage6 user's email account, they can 1) reset the password via email and then 2) reset the...Show more
vantage6 is an open-source infrastructure for privacy preserving analysis. Prior to version 5.0.0, if an attacker hacks into a vantage6 user's email account, they can 1) reset the password via email and then 2) reset the 2FA token via email. This way they reduce 2FA to 1FA (email access). Note that most email providers require 2FA to access email, so this issue is not very likely to cause issues. Version 5.0.0 fixes the issue. No known workarounds are available.Show less
1Termix
1Termix
Jun 17, 2026
Jun 5, 2026
N/A· v4
8.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Termix is a web-based server management platform with SSH terminal, tunneling, and file editing capabilities. The `POST /users/totp/disable` and `POST /users/totp/backup-codes` endpoints in Termix prior to version 2.3.2...Show more
Termix is a web-based server management platform with SSH terminal, tunneling, and file editing capabilities. The `POST /users/totp/disable` and `POST /users/totp/backup-codes` endpoints in Termix prior to version 2.3.2 accept the account password as a sole authentication factor for MFA-critical operations. An attacker who obtains a user's password (phishing, credential stuffing, the passwordHash leak in GHSA-xxxx) can disable TOTP entirely or regenerate backup codes, without ever possessing the TOTP device or knowing a valid TOTP code. This renders two-factor authentication ineffective. Version 2.3.2 patches the issue.Show less
1Alinto
1Sogo
Jun 17, 2026
Mar 22, 2026
N/A· v4
2.6 LOW· v3
N/A· v2
SOGo before 5.12.5 does not renew the OTP if a user disables/enables it, and has a too short length (only 12 digits instead of the 20 recommended).
1Cipplanner
1Cipace
Jun 17, 2026
Feb 11, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A Use of Single-factor Authentication vulnerability in the Authentication component of CIPPlanner CIPAce before 9.17 allows attackers to bypass a protection mechanism. When the system is configured to allow login with in...Show more
A Use of Single-factor Authentication vulnerability in the Authentication component of CIPPlanner CIPAce before 9.17 allows attackers to bypass a protection mechanism. When the system is configured to allow login with internal accounts, an attacker can possibly obtain full authentication if the secret in a single-factor authentication scheme gets compromised.Show less
1Zitadel
1Zitadel
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 29, 2025
8.7 HIGH· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Starting from 2.53.6, 2.54.3, and 2.55.0, Zitadel only required multi factor authentication in case the login policy has either enabled requireMFA or requireMFAForLocalUsers. If a user has set up MFA without this require...Show more
Starting from 2.53.6, 2.54.3, and 2.55.0, Zitadel only required multi factor authentication in case the login policy has either enabled requireMFA or requireMFAForLocalUsers. If a user has set up MFA without this requirement, Zitadel would consider single factor auhtenticated sessions as valid as well and not require multiple factors. Bypassing second authentication factors weakens multifactor authentication and enables attackers to bypass the more secure factor. An attacker can target the TOTP code alone, only six digits, bypassing password verification entirely and potentially compromising accounts with 2FA enabled. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.6.0, 3.4.3, and 2.71.18.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
Jul 8, 2025
N/A· v4
8.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
An unauthenticated attacker may exploit a scenario where a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) credential, extracted from a system missing specific security patches, is reused in a replay attack against a different...Show more
An unauthenticated attacker may exploit a scenario where a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) credential, extracted from a system missing specific security patches, is reused in a replay attack against a different system. Even if the target system is fully patched, successful exploitation could result in complete system compromise, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.Show less
1Shilpisoft
1Client Dashboard
Jun 17, 2026
Oct 4, 2024
7.6 HIGH· v4
8.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
This vulnerability exists in Shilpi Client Dashboard due to implementation of inadequate authentication mechanism in the login module wherein access to any users account is granted with just their corresponding mobile nu...Show more
This vulnerability exists in Shilpi Client Dashboard due to implementation of inadequate authentication mechanism in the login module wherein access to any users account is granted with just their corresponding mobile number. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by providing mobile number of targeted user, to obtain complete access to the targeted user account.Show less
1Ibm
1Spectrum Virtualize
Jun 17, 2026
Mar 5, 2024
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
LDAP users on IBM Spectrum Virtualize 8.5 which are configured to require multifactor authentication can still authenticate to the CIM interface using only username and password. This does not affect local users with MFA...Show more
LDAP users on IBM Spectrum Virtualize 8.5 which are configured to require multifactor authentication can still authenticate to the CIM interface using only username and password. This does not affect local users with MFA configured or remote users authenticating via single sign-on. IBM X-Force ID: 247033.Show less
1Ibm
1Powersc
Jun 17, 2026
Feb 2, 2024
N/A· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
IBM PowerSC 1.3, 2.0, and 2.1 uses single-factor authentication which can lead to unnecessary risk of compromise when compared with the benefits of a dual-factor authentication scheme. IBM X-Force ID: 275114.
1Pimcore
1Admin Classic Bundle
Jun 17, 2026
Nov 28, 2023
N/A· v4
7.2 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
The Admin Classic Bundle provides a Backend UI for Pimcore. `AdminBundle\Security\PimcoreUserTwoFactorCondition` introduced in v11 disable the two factor authentication for all non-admin security firewalls. An authentica...Show more
The Admin Classic Bundle provides a Backend UI for Pimcore. `AdminBundle\Security\PimcoreUserTwoFactorCondition` introduced in v11 disable the two factor authentication for all non-admin security firewalls. An authenticated user can access the system without having to provide the two factor credentials. This issue has been patched in version 1.2.2. Show less
1Jetbrains
1Teamcity
Jun 17, 2026
May 31, 2023
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
In JetBrains TeamCity before 2023.05 authentication checks were missing – 2FA was not checked for some sensitive account actions