Question 216 of 529
Software Development SecurityhardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

Quick Answer

The answer is privilege escalation via scope confusion. This attack exploits a misconfigured OAuth authorization server where default permissions, such as 'file:read', are granted without requiring explicit user or client scope assignment, allowing an attacker to obtain unauthorized read access by simply requesting a broader scope than intended. On the CISSP exam, this vulnerability tests your understanding of OAuth scope granularity and the principle of least privilege in access control, often appearing as a scenario where a policy grants excessive default permissions. A common trap is confusing this with CSRF, but CSRF is mitigated by state tokens, not scope policy. Remember the memory tip: "Scope confusion leads to permission diffusion"—if default scopes are too permissive, attackers can escalate privileges by requesting them.

CISSP Software Development Security Practice Question

This CISSP practice question tests your understanding of software development security. Match the stated requirement to the specific cloud service, access model, or configuration option — many options are valid in isolation but not for this scenario. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.

Exhibit

{
  "scopes": [
    {"name": "read", "permissions": ["file:read"]},
    {"name": "write", "permissions": ["file:write"]}
  ],
  "default_permissions": ["file:read"]
}

Refer to the exhibit. Which attack is this OAuth authorization server policy vulnerable to?

Question 1hardmultiple choice
Full question →

Exhibit

{
  "scopes": [
    {"name": "read", "permissions": ["file:read"]},
    {"name": "write", "permissions": ["file:write"]}
  ],
  "default_permissions": ["file:read"]
}

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.

Correct answer & explanation

Privilege escalation via scope confusion

Option B is correct because the default_permissions include 'file:read', which could allow an attacker to obtain read access without proper scope assignment. Option A is wrong because CSRF is mitigated by tokens, not scope policy. Option C is wrong because XSS is a client-side vulnerability. Option D is wrong because injection requires untrusted input to change the policy.

Key principle: Authentication proves identity; authorization controls what that identity can do after login. Both must work for full privileged access.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Privilege escalation via scope confusion

    Why this is correct

    Default permissions can grant unintended access if not carefully scoped.

    Related concept

    Authentication checks who the user is.

  • Cross-site scripting (XSS)

    Why it's wrong here

    XSS is a client-side injection attack, not a policy issue.

  • Cross-site request forgery (CSRF)

    Why it's wrong here

    CSRF is not directly related to scope permissions.

  • SQL injection

    Why it's wrong here

    SQL injection is not relevant to this JSON policy.

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: authentication is not authorization

Logging in proves the user can authenticate. It does not automatically mean the user is allowed to enter privileged or configuration mode. Watch for AAA authorization, privilege level and command authorization details.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

This kind of question is testing the difference between identity and permission. A user may successfully log in to a router because authentication is working, but still fail to enter configuration mode because authorization is missing, misconfigured or mapped to a lower privilege level.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Authentication checks who the user is.
  • Authorization controls what the user is allowed to do after login.
  • Privilege levels affect access to EXEC and configuration commands.
  • AAA, TACACS+ and RADIUS can separate login success from command access.

TExam Day Tips

  • Do not assume successful login means full administrative access.
  • Look for words such as cannot enter configuration mode, privilege level, authorization or command access.
  • Separate login problems from permission problems before choosing the answer.

Key takeaway

Authentication proves identity; authorization controls what that identity can do after login. Both must work for full privileged access.

Real-world example

How this comes up in practice

A security team runs a vulnerability scan on a web application and discovers an unpatched SQL injection flaw. The team prioritises remediation by CVSS score — critical flaws are patched within 24 hours, high within 7 days. Questions like this test whether you understand vulnerability management processes, scanning tools, and remediation prioritisation.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Review Cisco AAA concepts — authentication, authorization, and accounting. Study privilege levels (0–15), command authorization under TACACS+, and how RADIUS differs. Then practise related CISSP questions on access control and AAA configuration.

Related practice questions

Related CISSP practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

Practice this exam

Start a free CISSP practice session

Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this CISSP question test?

Software Development Security — This question tests Software Development Security — Authentication checks who the user is..

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: Privilege escalation via scope confusion — Option B is correct because the default_permissions include 'file:read', which could allow an attacker to obtain read access without proper scope assignment. Option A is wrong because CSRF is mitigated by tokens, not scope policy. Option C is wrong because XSS is a client-side vulnerability. Option D is wrong because injection requires untrusted input to change the policy.

What should I do if I get this CISSP question wrong?

Review Cisco AAA concepts — authentication, authorization, and accounting. Study privilege levels (0–15), command authorization under TACACS+, and how RADIUS differs. Then practise related CISSP questions on access control and AAA configuration.

What is the key concept behind this question?

Authentication checks who the user is.

About these practice questions

Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Last reviewed: Jun 24, 2026

Question Discussion

Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.

This CISSP practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISC2 certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CISSP exam.