CWE-89
AllowedImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
27801 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-GC92-8QG7-J9QW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-05 18:32 – Updated: 2025-05-05 18:32kashipara Online Service Management Portal V1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in osms/Requester/CheckStatus.php via the checkid parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-45322"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-05T16:15:51Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "kashipara Online Service Management Portal V1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in osms/Requester/CheckStatus.php via the checkid parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-gc92-8qg7-j9qw",
"modified": "2025-05-05T18:32:52Z",
"published": "2025-05-05T18:32:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-45322"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/0xBhushan/Writeups/blob/main/CVE/Kashipara/Online%20Service%20Management%20Portal/SQL%20Injection-CheckStatus.pdf"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCC8-9GXH-W296
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 00:09 – Updated: 2022-05-02 00:09SQL injection vulnerability in link.php in Linkarity allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the cat_id parameter. NOTE: although one component of Linkarity is distributable PHP code, this issue might be site-specific. If so, it should not be included in CVE.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2008-4353"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2008-09-30T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "SQL injection vulnerability in link.php in Linkarity allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the cat_id parameter. NOTE: although one component of Linkarity is distributable PHP code, this issue might be site-specific. If so, it should not be included in CVE.",
"id": "GHSA-gcc8-9gxh-w296",
"modified": "2022-05-02T00:09:16Z",
"published": "2022-05-02T00:09:16Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-4353"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/45100"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/6455"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GCCM-J8CW-3HCG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-10 06:31 – Updated: 2025-06-10 21:31The inprosysmedia-likes-dislikes-post WordPress plugin through 1.0.0 does not properly sanitise and escape a parameter before using it in a SQL statement via an AJAX action available to unauthenticated users, leading to a SQL injection
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-4840"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-06-10T06:15:22Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The inprosysmedia-likes-dislikes-post WordPress plugin through 1.0.0 does not properly sanitise and escape a parameter before using it in a SQL statement via an AJAX action available to unauthenticated users, leading to a SQL injection",
"id": "GHSA-gccm-j8cw-3hcg",
"modified": "2025-06-10T21:31:21Z",
"published": "2025-06-10T06:31:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-4840"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/85dc579d-edc4-421e-9bb1-09629dec527b"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCFC-4XC5-6793
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-27 12:30 – Updated: 2023-02-04 03:30A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in SourceCodester Online Tours & Travels Management System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file admin/booking_report.php. The manipulation of the argument to_date leads to sql injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-219600.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-0531"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-01-27T11:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in SourceCodester Online Tours \u0026 Travels Management System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file admin/booking_report.php. The manipulation of the argument to_date leads to sql injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-219600.",
"id": "GHSA-gcfc-4xc5-6793",
"modified": "2023-02-04T03:30:26Z",
"published": "2023-01-27T12:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-0531"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/linmoren/online-tours-travels-management-system/blob/main/tototo_date.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.219600"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.219600"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCFH-26RR-MGWJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-26 21:31 – Updated: 2025-06-26 21:31A SQL injection vulnerability exists in OS4Ed Open Source Information System Community v8.0 via the "student_id" and "TRANSFER{SCHOOL]" parameters in POST request sent to /TransferredOutModal.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-41691"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-06-24T16:15:22Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "A SQL injection vulnerability exists in OS4Ed Open Source Information System Community v8.0 via the \"student_id\" and \"TRANSFER{SCHOOL]\" parameters in POST request sent to /TransferredOutModal.php.",
"id": "GHSA-gcfh-26rr-mgwj",
"modified": "2025-06-26T21:31:09Z",
"published": "2025-06-26T21:31:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-41691"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OS4ED/openSIS-Classic"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://opensis.com"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://resources.s4e.io/blog/opensis-student-information-system-0-day-vulnerability-cve-2021-41691"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCFJ-6RH4-4C47
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:22 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:22SQL injection vulnerability in the web framework in Cisco Prime Collaboration Assurance 10.5(1) allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCus39887.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-6331"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-10-12T10:59:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "SQL injection vulnerability in the web framework in Cisco Prime Collaboration Assurance 10.5(1) allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCus39887.",
"id": "GHSA-gcfj-6rh4-4c47",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:22:05Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:22:05Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-6331"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20151008-pca2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1033782"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GCFP-W498-722F
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-09-29 18:30 – Updated: 2023-09-29 18:30A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in SourceCodester Engineers Online Portal 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file login.php. The manipulation of the argument username/password leads to sql injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. VDB-240906 is the identifier assigned to this vulnerability.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-5278"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-09-29T18:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in SourceCodester Engineers Online Portal 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file login.php. The manipulation of the argument username/password leads to sql injection. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. VDB-240906 is the identifier assigned to this vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-gcfp-w498-722f",
"modified": "2023-09-29T18:30:22Z",
"published": "2023-09-29T18:30:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-5278"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/llixixi/Engineers-Online-Portal-System/blob/main/Engineers%20Online%20Portal%20System%20login.php%20has%20Sqlinjection.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.240906"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.240906"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCFW-6V54-VQ4F
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-23 21:30 – Updated: 2025-11-23 21:30A flaw has been found in itsourcecode COVID Tracking System 1.0. This impacts an unknown function of the file /admin/?page=people. This manipulation of the argument ID causes sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-13568"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-74",
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-23T21:15:58Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A flaw has been found in itsourcecode COVID Tracking System 1.0. This impacts an unknown function of the file /admin/?page=people. This manipulation of the argument ID causes sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used.",
"id": "GHSA-gcfw-6v54-vq4f",
"modified": "2025-11-23T21:30:32Z",
"published": "2025-11-23T21:30:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-13568"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Abxery/cveee/issues/10"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://itsourcecode.com"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.333332"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.333332"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.698117"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-GCG3-C5P2-CQGG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-18 16:34 – Updated: 2026-03-20 21:33The fix for GHSA-p5g2-jm85-8g35 (ClickHouse SQL injection via aggregate query parameters) added column name validation to the _aggregateBy method but did not apply the same validation to three other query construction paths in StatementGenerator. The toSortStatement, toSelectStatement, and toGroupByStatement methods accept user-controlled object keys from API request bodies and interpolate them as ClickHouse Identifier parameters without verifying they correspond to actual model columns.
ClickHouse Identifier parameters are substituted directly into queries without escaping, so an attacker who can reach any analytics list or aggregate endpoint can inject arbitrary SQL through crafted sort, select, or groupBy keys.
Details
Root cause
StatementGenerator.ts has four methods that iterate over user-provided object keys to build SQL:
| Method | Validates keys? |
|---|---|
toWhereStatement (line 292) |
Yes - calls this.model.getTableColumn(key) |
toSortStatement (line 467) |
No |
toSelectStatement (line 483) |
No |
toGroupByStatement (line 451) |
No |
In Statement.ts, when a value passed to the SQL tagged template is a string, it receives the Identifier data type (line 40). Per ClickHouse documentation, Identifier parameters are substituted directly into the query without quoting or escaping. This is correct for trusted column names but unsafe for user input.
Input flow
BaseAnalyticsAPI.ts deserializes sort, select, and groupBy directly from req.body (lines 239-253) and passes them to the service layer without column validation:
sort = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body["sort"]) as Sort<AnalyticsDataModel>;
select = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body["select"]) as Select<AnalyticsDataModel>;
groupBy = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body["groupBy"]) as GroupBy<AnalyticsDataModel>;
Affected endpoints
Any endpoint backed by BaseAnalyticsAPI.getList() or BaseAnalyticsAPI.getAggregate() - this includes analytics queries for logs, metrics, spans, and exceptions.
Impact
An authenticated user can inject arbitrary ClickHouse SQL through crafted column names in sort, select, or groupBy request parameters. This allows reading, modifying, or deleting analytics data (logs, metrics, traces) stored in ClickHouse. PostgreSQL data is not affected (separate query path).
Suggested Fix
Add the same getTableColumn() validation already present in toWhereStatement to the three unvalidated methods:
// toSortStatement, toSelectStatement, toGroupByStatement
for (const key in sort) {
if (!this.model.getTableColumn(key)) {
throw new BadDataException(`Unknown column: ${key}`);
}
// existing logic
}
This matches the pattern used in the GHSA-p5g2 fix for _aggregateBy and the existing toWhereStatement validation.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "oneuptime"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "10.0.34"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-33142"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-18T16:34:18Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-20T21:17:14Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The fix for GHSA-p5g2-jm85-8g35 (ClickHouse SQL injection via aggregate query parameters) added column name validation to the `_aggregateBy` method but did not apply the same validation to three other query construction paths in `StatementGenerator`. The `toSortStatement`, `toSelectStatement`, and `toGroupByStatement` methods accept user-controlled object keys from API request bodies and interpolate them as ClickHouse `Identifier` parameters without verifying they correspond to actual model columns.\n\nClickHouse Identifier parameters are substituted directly into queries without escaping, so an attacker who can reach any analytics list or aggregate endpoint can inject arbitrary SQL through crafted `sort`, `select`, or `groupBy` keys.\n\n## Details\n\n### Root cause\n\n`StatementGenerator.ts` has four methods that iterate over user-provided object keys to build SQL:\n\n| Method | Validates keys? |\n|--------|----------------|\n| `toWhereStatement` (line 292) | Yes - calls `this.model.getTableColumn(key)` |\n| `toSortStatement` (line 467) | **No** |\n| `toSelectStatement` (line 483) | **No** |\n| `toGroupByStatement` (line 451) | **No** |\n\nIn `Statement.ts`, when a value passed to the `SQL` tagged template is a string, it receives the `Identifier` data type (line 40). Per [ClickHouse documentation](https://clickhouse.com/docs/en/sql-reference/syntax#defining-and-using-query-parameters), Identifier parameters are substituted directly into the query without quoting or escaping. This is correct for trusted column names but unsafe for user input.\n\n### Input flow\n\n`BaseAnalyticsAPI.ts` deserializes `sort`, `select`, and `groupBy` directly from `req.body` (lines 239-253) and passes them to the service layer without column validation:\n\n```typescript\nsort = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body[\"sort\"]) as Sort\u003cAnalyticsDataModel\u003e;\nselect = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body[\"select\"]) as Select\u003cAnalyticsDataModel\u003e;\ngroupBy = JSONFunctions.deserialize(req.body[\"groupBy\"]) as GroupBy\u003cAnalyticsDataModel\u003e;\n```\n\n### Affected endpoints\n\nAny endpoint backed by `BaseAnalyticsAPI.getList()` or `BaseAnalyticsAPI.getAggregate()` - this includes analytics queries for logs, metrics, spans, and exceptions.\n\n## Impact\n\nAn authenticated user can inject arbitrary ClickHouse SQL through crafted column names in sort, select, or groupBy request parameters. This allows reading, modifying, or deleting analytics data (logs, metrics, traces) stored in ClickHouse. PostgreSQL data is not affected (separate query path).\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nAdd the same `getTableColumn()` validation already present in `toWhereStatement` to the three unvalidated methods:\n\n```typescript\n// toSortStatement, toSelectStatement, toGroupByStatement\nfor (const key in sort) {\n if (!this.model.getTableColumn(key)) {\n throw new BadDataException(`Unknown column: ${key}`);\n }\n // existing logic\n}\n```\n\nThis matches the pattern used in the GHSA-p5g2 fix for `_aggregateBy` and the existing `toWhereStatement` validation.",
"id": "GHSA-gcg3-c5p2-cqgg",
"modified": "2026-03-20T21:33:25Z",
"published": "2026-03-18T16:34:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/OneUptime/oneuptime/security/advisories/GHSA-gcg3-c5p2-cqgg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-33142"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/OneUptime/oneuptime"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "OneUptime ClickHouse vulnerable to SQL Injection via unvalidated column identifiers in sort, select, and groupBy parameters"
}
GHSA-GCGJ-P97F-WP62
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-09 00:00 – Updated: 2022-09-16 00:00School Activity Updates with SMS Notification v1.0 was discovered to contain a SQL injection vulnerability via the component /modules/user/index.php?view=edit&id=.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-38267"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-09-08T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "School Activity Updates with SMS Notification v1.0 was discovered to contain a SQL injection vulnerability via the component /modules/user/index.php?view=edit\u0026id=.",
"id": "GHSA-gcgj-p97f-wp62",
"modified": "2022-09-16T00:00:39Z",
"published": "2022-09-09T00:00:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-38267"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/moyess/bug_report/blob/main/vendors/janobe/school-activity-updates-sms-notification/SQLi-1.md"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- For example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL injection if used properly.
Mitigation MIT-27
Strategy: Parameterization
- If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
- Process SQL queries using prepared statements, parameterized queries, or stored procedures. These features should accept parameters or variables and support strong typing. Do not dynamically construct and execute query strings within these features using "exec" or similar functionality, since this may re-introduce the possibility of SQL injection. [REF-867]
Mitigation MIT-17
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
- Specifically, follow the principle of least privilege when creating user accounts to a SQL database. The database users should only have the minimum privileges necessary to use their account. If the requirements of the system indicate that a user can read and modify their own data, then limit their privileges so they cannot read/write others' data. Use the strictest permissions possible on all database objects, such as execute-only for stored procedures.
Mitigation MIT-15
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Mitigation MIT-28
Strategy: Output Encoding
- While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88).
- Instead of building a new implementation, such features may be available in the database or programming language. For example, the Oracle DBMS_ASSERT package can check or enforce that parameters have certain properties that make them less vulnerable to SQL injection. For MySQL, the mysql_real_escape_string() API function is available in both C and PHP.
Mitigation MIT-5
Strategy: Input Validation
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When constructing SQL query strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping.
- Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing SQL injection, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent SQL injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, the name "O'Reilly" would likely pass the validation step, since it is a common last name in the English language. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the database because it contains the "'" apostrophe character, which would need to be escaped or otherwise handled. In this case, stripping the apostrophe might reduce the risk of SQL injection, but it would produce incorrect behavior because the wrong name would be recorded.
- When feasible, it may be safest to disallow meta-characters entirely, instead of escaping them. This will provide some defense in depth. After the data is entered into the database, later processes may neglect to escape meta-characters before use, and you may not have control over those processes.
Mitigation MIT-21
Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Mitigation MIT-39
- Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success.
- If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files.
- Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not.
- In the context of SQL Injection, error messages revealing the structure of a SQL query can help attackers tailor successful attack strings.
Mitigation MIT-29
Strategy: Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481.
Mitigation MIT-16
Strategy: Environment Hardening
When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
CAPEC-108: Command Line Execution through SQL Injection
An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
CAPEC-109: Object Relational Mapping Injection
An attacker leverages a weakness present in the database access layer code generated with an Object Relational Mapping (ORM) tool or a weakness in the way that a developer used a persistence framework to inject their own SQL commands to be executed against the underlying database. The attack here is similar to plain SQL injection, except that the application does not use JDBC to directly talk to the database, but instead it uses a data access layer generated by an ORM tool or framework (e.g. Hibernate). While most of the time code generated by an ORM tool contains safe access methods that are immune to SQL injection, sometimes either due to some weakness in the generated code or due to the fact that the developer failed to use the generated access methods properly, SQL injection is still possible.
CAPEC-110: SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering
An attacker modifies the parameters of the SOAP message that is sent from the service consumer to the service provider to initiate a SQL injection attack. On the service provider side, the SOAP message is parsed and parameters are not properly validated before being used to access a database in a way that does not use parameter binding, thus enabling the attacker to control the structure of the executed SQL query. This pattern describes a SQL injection attack with the delivery mechanism being a SOAP message.
CAPEC-470: Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database
An attacker is able to leverage access gained to the database to read / write data to the file system, compromise the operating system, create a tunnel for accessing the host machine, and use this access to potentially attack other machines on the same network as the database machine. Traditionally SQL injections attacks are viewed as a way to gain unauthorized read access to the data stored in the database, modify the data in the database, delete the data, etc. However, almost every data base management system (DBMS) system includes facilities that if compromised allow an attacker complete access to the file system, operating system, and full access to the host running the database. The attacker can then use this privileged access to launch subsequent attacks. These facilities include dropping into a command shell, creating user defined functions that can call system level libraries present on the host machine, stored procedures, etc.
CAPEC-66: SQL Injection
This attack exploits target software that constructs SQL statements based on user input. An attacker crafts input strings so that when the target software constructs SQL statements based on the input, the resulting SQL statement performs actions other than those the application intended. SQL Injection results from failure of the application to appropriately validate input.
CAPEC-7: Blind SQL Injection
Blind SQL Injection results from an insufficient mitigation for SQL Injection. Although suppressing database error messages are considered best practice, the suppression alone is not sufficient to prevent SQL Injection. Blind SQL Injection is a form of SQL Injection that overcomes the lack of error messages. Without the error messages that facilitate SQL Injection, the adversary constructs input strings that probe the target through simple Boolean SQL expressions. The adversary can determine if the syntax and structure of the injection was successful based on whether the query was executed or not. Applied iteratively, the adversary determines how and where the target is vulnerable to SQL Injection.