CBA emphasizes the principle of least privilege to limit the scope of potential security breaches by providing only the necessary access to components.

CBA mitigates the impact of a security breach by limiting it to the breached component, thanks to the independence of components.

Not properly securing component-to-component communication in CBA can increase susceptibility to data interception and tampering, posing a security risk.

CBA can contribute to better resilience against DDoS attacks by isolating components, limiting the impact of such attacks to specific components.

A potential drawback of using CBA is that the increased complexity and overhead may not be justified for simpler applications, and a monolithic architecture may be more suitable.

The distributed nature of CBA increases the need for granular logging and monitoring to trace activities across components, aiding in security incident detection and response.

CBA can be more adaptable to evolving security requirements and standards because the independence of components allows for easier updates and compliance with new standards.

The use of distributed databases in CBA can impact security because a compromise in a distributed database can lead to security breaches across multiple components.

A potential challenge in CBA is the need to manually enforce and manage security policies across numerous components to ensure consistency.

CBA can be impacted by the difficulty in coordinating updates across multiple components, potentially impacting security and availability.

A potential security risk associated with inter-component communication in CBA is unauthorized access and data interception during communication between components.

CBA can simplify secure session management by allowing independent management for each component, reducing the impact of security incidents on session handling.

CBA can be more resilient in recovering from failures or crashes because the independence of components allows for targeted recovery efforts, limiting the impact to specific components.

CBA increases flexibility in technology choices, as each component can adopt different technology stacks based on its specific requirements.

Using outdated technology stacks in CBA poses a risk as it may expose the system to known vulnerabilities and lack of support, impacting overall security.

CBA can simplify the enforcement of consistent coding standards across all components, ensuring uniformity in coding practices.

The lack of proper error handling in CBA can increase vulnerability to attacks, including information disclosure, as attackers may exploit unhandled errors.

CBA can simplify the integration of third-party components by allowing independent incorporation of such components for specific needs, enhancing flexibility and functionality.

CBA can contribute to better scalability options by allowing independent scaling of specific components, optimizing resource allocation based on individual component requirements.

Enforcing strong authentication measures is crucial in CBA to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access and strengthen overall security across distributed components.

CBA can simplify the management of security configurations by allowing centralized control, ensuring consistency and effective security measures across components.

Not implementing proper access controls in CBA can increase the risk of unauthorized access and data breaches, compromising the overall security of the system.

Component-Based Architecture (CBA) in web applications is characterized by the independence of components, where reusable components operate as separate entities.

The reuse of components in CBA can increase the risk of security vulnerabilities due to interconnected components, potentially introducing new attack surfaces.

Insecure direct object references are a common vulnerability associated with the interconnection of components in CBA, often arising due to insufficient access controls.

The distributed nature of CBA increases the complexity of securing communication and data flow between components, presenting unique security challenges.

Using standardized communication protocols in CBA provides improved isolation and consistency for securing communication between components, establishing a common and secure foundation.

Man-in-the-middle attacks are more likely to exploit vulnerabilities in CBA communication protocols, as attackers intercept and potentially manipulate data flowing between components.

A challenge associated with securing APIs in CBA is properly securing communication between components and validating inputs to prevent security vulnerabilities.

The use of API gateways in CBA can simplify security measures by centralizing access control and authentication, providing a unified point for managing security policies.