Web Application Security Threats in 2025: 10 Critical Risks Every Organization Must Address

In 2025, the web application security challenge has intensified as AI tools exponentially accelerate code production while APIs form the backbone of modern digital experiences. Organizations now face a perfect storm: rapid development cycles, expanding attack surfaces, and security teams stretched thin to protect increasingly complex application ecosystems.

In this article, we’ll explore ten critical web application security threats for 2025 as identified in the OWASP Top 10, the consequences of these threats, how web applications are vulnerable to them, and how to mitigate them in today’s fast-paced development environment.

10 Web Application Security Threats for 2025

Here are the ten critical web application security threats we will cover in this article:

1. Broken Access Control (updated for API-first environments)
2. Cryptographic Failures
3. Injection (expanded to include AI prompt injection)
4. Insecure Design
5. Security Misconfiguration
6. Vulnerable and Outdated Components
7. Identification and Authentication Failures
8. Software and Data Integrity Failures
9. Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
10. Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

1. Broken Access Control

Risk Level: Critical

Broken access control occurs when an application fails to properly restrict what authenticated users are allowed to do, allowing attackers to access unauthorized functionality and data. In 2025’s API-driven landscape, this has evolved beyond simple URL manipulation to include sophisticated attacks on microservices authentication, JWT token abuse, and API endpoint exploitation. This category also encompasses Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks, where applications fail to verify that users actually intended to perform specific actions.

For example, an application may allow users to access their account information by entering their account number in a URL, such as “www.example.com/account/123”. An attacker could potentially access other users’ account information by changing the account number in the URL. In modern API environments, similar attacks target JSON parameters, API keys, and microservice communications.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Implement proper access controls and session management with zero-trust principles
• Use robust API authentication frameworks (OAuth 2.0, OpenID Connect)
• Validate user input and apply the principle of least privilege
• Avoid using predictable references; consider using globally unique identifiers (GUIDs)
• Implement runtime API security monitoring to detect access pattern anomalies

2. Cryptographic Failures (formerly Sensitive Data Exposure)

Risk Level: High

Cryptographic failures refer to the improper handling of cryptographic keys and sensitive data protection, such as storing keys in plain text, using weak encryption algorithms, or inadequate protection of data in transit. This can allow attackers to gain access to sensitive data through compromised cryptographic implementations.

In 2025, with stricter data protection regulations and sophisticated attacks, cryptographic failures expose organizations to significant risk through weak encryption, poor key management, and protocol vulnerabilities.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Use strong cryptographic algorithms, such as AES-256 or RSA-4096, to secure stored data
• Implement key management best practices, including hardware security modules and regular key rotation
• Enforce HTTPS everywhere with proper certificate management and pinning
• Use secure storage solutions and avoid storing sensitive data unnecessarily
• Regular cryptographic algorithm audits and updates to maintain current standards

3. Injection (including SQL Injection and emerging AI Prompt Injection)

Risk Level: Critical

Injection attacks are executed when an attacker injects malicious code into an application through user input fields. While SQL injection remains a primary concern, 2025 brings new injection vectors including NoSQL databases, AI model prompts, and containerized environments.

This category includes several specific attack types:

• SQL Injection: Malicious code injected into database queries
• Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): Malicious scripts injected into web pages that execute in users’ browsers
• NoSQL Injection: Similar attacks targeting NoSQL databases
• AI Prompt Injection: Malicious inputs designed to manipulate AI model outputs

A SQL injection attack can accomplish many different things, including allowing the attacker to gain unauthorized access to sensitive data stored in the database or manipulate/delete data through commands like DROP TABLE or DROP DATABASE. Similarly, XSS attacks can steal user session data, deface websites, or redirect users to malicious sites, while AI prompt injection can manipulate machine learning models to produce unintended outputs or access restricted information.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Validate user input using allowlists rather than blocklists
• Use output encoding, which involves converting special characters such as < and > into their HTML entity equivalents
• Use prepared statements, parameterized queries, or stored procedures instead of dynamic SQL
• Sanitize inputs for AI/ML model interactions and implement prompt validation
• Most modern languages and frameworks have recommended ways of handling form input securely

4. Insecure Design

Risk Level: High

Insecure design represents a new category addressing fundamental flaws in application architecture and design patterns. In 2025’s fast-paced development environment, rushed architectural decisions often introduce systemic weaknesses that can’t be fixed through implementation changes alone.

This differs from security misconfiguration by focusing on design and architectural flaws rather than implementation issues. Common problems include insufficient threat modeling, overly permissive API designs, and weak business logic validation.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Integrate threat modeling into the design process from the start
• Implement security by design principles and secure design patterns
• Use established security frameworks and conduct regular architecture reviews
• Apply the principle of least privilege in design decisions
• Establish secure design standards and review processes

5. Security Misconfiguration

Risk Level: High

Security misconfiguration occurs when security settings are not properly defined, implemented, maintained, or monitored. In 2025’s complex application stacks—spanning containers, orchestration platforms, cloud services, and numerous integrations—misconfiguration opportunities have multiplied exponentially.

Common misconfigurations include exposed cloud storage buckets, default credentials in production, overly permissive Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) policies, and unnecessary services enabled.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Implement infrastructure as code with security templates and baselines
• Regular security configuration audits and automated scanning
• Use configuration management tools with built-in security controls
• Implement proper CORS configuration for API endpoints
• Establish hardening guides and secure configuration standards

6. Vulnerable and Outdated Components (formerly Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities)

Risk Level: High

Using components with known vulnerabilities refers to the use of outdated code libraries, frameworks, or other components with known security issues. In 2025, with AI-accelerated development increasing code reuse and dependency complexity, this risk has significantly amplified.

Many websites today are built using complex components and dependencies, including open-source libraries that may contain vulnerabilities. Supply chain attacks targeting popular libraries have become increasingly sophisticated, making component security critical.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Keep track of component versions and maintain software bills of materials (SBOMs)
• Use security scanners to identify known vulnerabilities and automated tools like Dependabot
• Implement automated dependency scanning in CI/CD pipelines
• Regular security assessments and timely patch management
• Consider using private package repositories for critical components

7. Identification and Authentication Failures

Risk Level: High

Identification and authentication failures occur when authentication mechanisms are implemented incorrectly, allowing attackers to compromise passwords, keys, or session tokens, or exploit other implementation flaws to assume users’ identities temporarily or permanently.

Modern attacks leverage credential stuffing, password spraying, and sophisticated session management exploits to bypass authentication controls.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Implement robust multi-factor authentication across all critical systems
• Use secure session management practices with proper timeout and token handling
• Apply rate limiting and account lockout mechanisms to prevent brute force attacks
• Monitor for anomalous authentication patterns and implement adaptive authentication
• Enforce strong password policies and consider passwordless authentication options

8. Software and Data Integrity Failures

Risk Level: Medium-High

This emerging category addresses supply chain attacks, unauthorized code modifications, and integrity failures in CI/CD pipelines. Unlike traditional malware, these attacks compromise applications through legitimate software update mechanisms and development processes.

Software and data integrity failures can result from malicious code injection in CI/CD pipelines, compromised software update mechanisms, and unauthorized modifications to production systems.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Implement code signing and verification processes throughout the development lifecycle
• Secure CI/CD pipelines with proper access controls and monitoring
• Use immutable infrastructure and deployment practices where possible
• Monitor for unauthorized code changes and maintain audit trails
• Implement software composition analysis and integrity checks

9. Security Logging and Monitoring Failures (formerly Insufficient Logging and Monitoring)

Risk Level: Medium

Insufficient logging and monitoring refer to a lack of proper logging and monitoring processes to detect and respond to security threats. This can allow attackers to go unnoticed and continue to compromise the system, potentially leading to data loss and financial damage.

It’s also important to be aware of what is being logged. If sensitive information, such as credit card numbers or passwords, are being written to logs, attackers who gain access could use this information maliciously.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Enable comprehensive logging for key events and actions across all application layers
• Use log analysis tools and SIEM solutions to automate review and identify potential security issues
• Set up real-time alerting systems to notify administrators of potential security threats
• Ensure that sensitive information is either excluded from logs or properly masked
• Implement baseline behavior patterns for effective anomaly detection

10. Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Risk Level: Medium

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) attacks trick applications into making unintended requests to internal systems, potentially exposing sensitive data or enabling further attacks against internal infrastructure. In cloud environments, SSRF can be particularly dangerous for accessing metadata services and internal APIs.

SSRF attacks can enable internal network reconnaissance, access to cloud metadata services, port scanning of internal systems, and bypassing firewalls and network segmentation.

Mitigation Strategies:

• Validate and sanitize all URLs and user inputs that could trigger server-side requests
• Implement allowlists for external requests and restrict internal network access
• Use network segmentation and firewalls to limit potential attack scope
• Monitor outbound network traffic for unusual patterns
• Apply the principle of least privilege to server-side request capabilities

Emerging Web Application Security Risks in 2025

As AI-accelerated development and API-first architectures reshape how applications are built, new categories of threats are emerging that go beyond the traditional OWASP Top 10:

• API security challenges, such as shadow APIs that emerge outside governance, automated API abuse targeting business logic, and GraphQL-specific vulnerabilities like query complexity attacks
• AI-powered attack vectors, including prompt injection attacks targeting AI models, model poisoning through compromised training data, and AI-generated phishing campaigns
• Container and cloud-native risks like container escape vulnerabilities, Kubernetes misconfigurations, and serverless security gaps in Function-as-a-Service environments

What Is the Biggest Security Threat to a Web Application?

The most common application security threats according to the current OWASP Top 10 are broken access control, cryptographic failures, and injection attacks (including SQL injection and cross-site scripting). In 2025’s API-driven landscape, broken access control has become particularly critical due to the complexity of microservices authentication and authorization.

It’s difficult to determine the single biggest threat to a web application, as it depends on the specific application and its unique vulnerabilities and architecture. By using the latest tools for security scanning and monitoring, implementing continuous security testing in CI/CD pipelines, and following secure coding practices, developers and their organizations can significantly limit their exposure.

Tips for Building Modern Application Security

Traditional application security approaches like penetration testing can’t keep pace with AI-accelerated development and API-first architectures. Organizations need the right combination of automated application security tools and platforms, plus security practices that:

• Start at the source and understand the complete API attack surface from source code repositories
• Integrate with development and provide security feedback directly in IDEs and CI/CD pipelines
• Enable developer remediation by delivering actionable guidance in developers’ language
• Provide continuous oversight to maintain visibility across the entire security program

Prioritize Security at the Speed of Development with StackHawk

StackHawk is built for teams looking to get dynamic application security testing (DAST) and API security testing for modern applications. Discover APIs from source code, integrate automated testing directly into CI/CD pipelines, and gain continuous visibility into your security posture—without slowing down development. 

StackHawk scans running applications via CI/CD pipelines for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities and beyond, enabling developers with continuous testing coverage and actionable remediation—all before applications reach production. See StackHawk in action.