ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Large Language Model-Powered Protected Interface Evasion: Automated Discovery of Broken Access Control Vulnerabilities in Internet of Things Devices.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Broken access control vulnerabilities pose significant security risks to the protected web interfaces of IoT devices, enabling adversaries to gain unauthorized access to sensitive configurations and even use them as stepping stones for attacking the intranet. Despite its ranking as the first in the latest OWASP Top 10, there remains a lack of effective methodologies to detect these vulnerabilities systematically. We present ACBreaker, a novel methodology powered by a large language model (LLM), to effectively identify broken access control vulnerabilities in the protected web interfaces of IoT devices. Our methodology consists of three stages. The initial stage transforms firmware code that exceeds the LLM context window into semantically intact code snippets. The second stage involves using an LLM to extract device-specific information from firmware code. The final stage integrates this information into the mutation-based fuzzer to improve fuzzing effectiveness and employ differential analysis to identify vulnerabilities. We evaluated ACBreaker across 11 IoT devices, analyzing 1,274,646 lines of code and discovering 39 previously unknown vulnerabilities. We further analyzed these vulnerabilities, categorizing them into three types that contribute to protected interface evasion, and provided mitigation suggestions. These vulnerabilities were responsibly disclosed to vendors, with CVE IDs assigned to those in six IoT devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.