AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Insecure Design

skill-scholarly360-owasp-top10-web-skills-insecure-design · by scholarly360

>

No reviews yet
0 installs
38 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-scholarly360-owasp-top10-web-skills-insecure-design

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-scholarly360-owasp-top10-web-skills-insecure-design)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
5mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Insecure Design? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

OWASP A06:2025 — Insecure Design

What This Skill Does

Guides detection, analysis, and remediation of Insecure Design vulnerabilities — architecture-level failures where security controls are absent or structurally inadequate. Unlike implementation bugs, insecure design cannot be fixed by patching code alone; it requires redesigning the flow or adding missing control layers.

OWASP 2025 position: #6 (down from #4 in 2021, as threat modeling adoption has improved) CWEs covered: 39 | Avg incidence: 1.86% Key CWEs: CWE-434, CWE-269, CWE-362, CWE-799, CWE-602


Core Concepts

Design vs. Implementation

| Insecure Design (A06) | Implementation Bug (other categories) | |---|---| | Rate limiting never architected into login flow | Rate limiter present but misconfigured | | File upload stored in web root by design | Upload handler missing extension check | | No tenant isolation in multi-tenant DB schema | Query missing WHERE clause | | Business logic allows negative quantities | Missing server-side input validation |

A design flaw requires adding a new control or refactoring the architecture, not just patching existing code.


Testing Checklist for FastAPI / Flask

1. Rate Limiting (CWE-799)

Verify that login, registration, password reset, and high-value transaction endpoints enforce rate limits.

FastAPI — SlowAPI:

from slowapi import Limiter
from slowapi.util import get_remote_address

limiter = Limiter(key_func=get_remote_address)

@app.post("/login")
@limiter.limit("5/minute")
async def login(request: Request, ...): ...

Flask — Flask-Limiter:

from flask_limiter import Limiter
limiter = Limiter(app, key_func=get_remote_address)

@app.route("/login", methods=["POST"])
@limiter.limit("5 per minute")
def login(): ...

Red flags to flag in review:

  • Login, /register, /reset-password, /checkout routes with no rate-limiting decorator
  • RATELIMIT_ENABLED = False or limiter initialized without being applied to sensitive routes
  • Rate limits too permissive (e.g., 1000/minute on auth endpoints)

2. File Upload Security (CWE-434)

File uploads must be validated by content, not just extension, and stored outside the web root.

import magic  # python-magic

ALLOWED_MIME = {"image/jpeg", "image/png", "application/pdf"}
MAX_SIZE = 5 * 1024 * 1024  # 5 MB

@app.post("/upload")
async def upload(file: UploadFile):
    content = await file.read(MAX_SIZE + 1)
    if len(content) > MAX_SIZE:
        raise HTTPException(400, "File too large")
    mime = magic.from_buffer(content[:2048], mime=True)
    if mime not in ALLOWED_MIME:
        raise HTTPException(400, "Unsupported file type")
    # Store in /var/app/uploads/ — NOT inside static/ or public/
    safe_path = UPLOAD_DIR / secrets.token_hex(16)
    safe_path.write_bytes(content)

Red flags:

  • Relying on file.content_type or extension alone (filename.endswith(".jpg"))
  • Storing uploads in static/, public/, or any web-accessible path
  • No file size cap
  • Serving uploaded files via direct URL without authentication

3. Business Logic Flaws

Business logic flaws are application-specific — they exploit valid flows in unintended ways.

Common patterns to test:

| Scenario | Test | |---|---| | Negative quantity in cart | POST with quantity: -1, verify order total doesn't go negative | | Price manipulation | POST with a price field — verify server ignores client-supplied price | | Concurrent purchase race | Parallel requests to buy last item — verify only one succeeds | | Booking system abuse | Book same slot twice in parallel | | Coupon reuse | Apply same coupon twice before first transaction commits |

FastAPI example — safe quantity handling:

class OrderItem(BaseModel):
    product_id: int
    quantity: int = Field(..., ge=1, le=100)  # enforced server-side

Red flags:

  • Price, discount, or role fields accepted from client payload
  • No idempotency key or duplicate-check on financial transactions
  • Quantity or amount not bounded with ge=1 in Pydantic or equivalent

4. Tenant Isolation (CWE-269)

In multi-tenant apps, every DB query must scope to the authenticated tenant.

Pattern to enforce:

# UNSAFE — returns data across all tenants
def get_reports(db: Session):
    return db.query(Report).all()

# SAFE — scoped to current tenant
def get_reports(db: Session, current_user: User):
    return db.query(Report).filter(Report.tenant_id == current_user.tenant_id).all()

Red flags:

  • Any db.query(Model).all() without tenant/user filter
  • Admin-like queries reachable from user-facing endpoints
  • Tenant ID passed in request body (must come from JWT/session, not user input)

5. Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security (CWE-602)

Security enforced only in the browser is trivially bypassed via direct API calls.

Red flags:

  • Authorization check only in JavaScript / frontend, not in the API route
  • Hidden form fields controlling price, role, or access level
  • Feature flags based on client-provided values (use JWT claims or server session)
# WRONG — trusting client-supplied role
@app.post("/admin/action")
async def admin_action(role: str = Body(...)):  # never do this
    if role == "admin":
        ...

# CORRECT — derive from authenticated token
@app.post("/admin/action")
async def admin_action(current_user: User = Depends(get_current_user)):
    if current_user.role != "admin":
        raise HTTPException(403)
    ...

6. Credential / Account Recovery Design

Insecure recovery flows are a design flaw, not an implementation bug.

Red flags:

  • Knowledge-based security questions (mother's maiden name, pet name) — guessable from social media
  • Password reset link not expiring within 15–60 minutes
  • Reset token sent over HTTP or stored without hashing
  • Account enumeration possible via reset flow ("no account found" vs. silent success)

Safe pattern:

# Generate short-lived, single-use, high-entropy token
token = secrets.token_urlsafe(32)
expiry = datetime.utcnow() + timedelta(minutes=30)
# Store hash of token, not the token itself
db_token = PasswordResetToken(
    user_id=user.id,
    token_hash=hashlib.sha256(token.encode()).hexdigest(),
    expires_at=expiry,
    used=False
)

Threat Modeling Guidance (STRIDE)

Use STRIDE to find design flaws before they reach code:

| Threat | Applies to | Example in FastAPI/Flask | |---|---|---| | Spoofing | Auth flows | Predictable session tokens, missing MFA | | Tampering | Data in transit/storage | Missing HMAC on signed data, writable uploads | | Repudiation | Audit logs | Missing request logging on financial actions | | Information Disclosure | Error messages, API docs | /docs open in prod, stack traces in 500 | | Denial of Service | Rate limiting, resource use | No request size cap, missing rate limiter | | Elevation of Privilege | Authorization design | Client-supplied role, missing tenant scope |


Remediation Priority Matrix

| Finding | Severity | Fix complexity | |---|---|---| | No rate limiting on auth/payment endpoints | High | Low — add SlowAPI/Flask-Limiter | | File uploads stored in web root | High | Medium — move storage path, add serving layer | | Client-supplied price/role fields | Critical | Low — remove field from request model | | Missing tenant scope on DB queries | Critical | Medium — audit all queries | | Knowledge-based security questions | Medium | High — redesign recovery flow | | Race condition on inventory/booking | Medium | High — add DB-level locking or idempotency |


Reference Material

For deeper dives, see:

  • references/cwe-details.md — full CWE descriptions and examples for all 39 CWEs in A06
  • references/threat-modeling.md — STRIDE worksheet template for FastAPI/Flask apps

For related OWASP categories that overlap with design issues:

  • A01 Broken Access Control — when the design grants too much access by default
  • A07 Authentication Failures — when auth flow design is the root cause
  • A10 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions — when error recovery design fails closed

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.