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.
27409 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-MJRQ-9CJ9-FHHQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-26 15:32 – Updated: 2026-06-26 15:32Administrator SQL Injection in Popup box <= 6.0.1 versions.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-57631"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-26T15:16:50Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Administrator SQL Injection in Popup box \u003c= 6.0.1 versions.",
"id": "GHSA-mjrq-9cj9-fhhq",
"modified": "2026-06-26T15:32:17Z",
"published": "2026-06-26T15:32:17Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-57631"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/ays-popup-box/vulnerability/wordpress-popup-box-plugin-6-0-1-sql-injection-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJRX-V73W-6P2J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:02 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:02SQL injection vulnerability in inc/mod/newsletter/options.php in GeniXCMS 0.0.8 allows remote authenticated administrators to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the recipient parameter to gxadmin/index.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-5347"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-01-12T06:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "SQL injection vulnerability in inc/mod/newsletter/options.php in GeniXCMS 0.0.8 allows remote authenticated administrators to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the recipient parameter to gxadmin/index.php.",
"id": "GHSA-mjrx-v73w-6p2j",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:02:38Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:02:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-5347"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/semplon/GeniXCMS/issues/61"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/95684"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJV9-6VRM-GQP7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 04:03 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:49E-commerce MLM Software 1.0 has SQL Injection via the service_detail.php pid parameter, event_detail.php eventid parameter, or news_detail.php newid parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-17610"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-12-13T09:29:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "E-commerce MLM Software 1.0 has SQL Injection via the service_detail.php pid parameter, event_detail.php eventid parameter, or news_detail.php newid parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-mjv9-6vrm-gqp7",
"modified": "2025-04-20T03:49:56Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T04:03:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-17610"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://packetstormsecurity.com/files/145305/E-commerce-MLM-Software-1.0-SQL-Injection.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/43277"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJV9-FW9Q-98GX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-15 09:30 – Updated: 2025-03-15 09:30The Thumbnail carousel slider plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'id' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.4 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-25222"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-03-15T07:15:33Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Thumbnail carousel slider plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the \u0027id\u0027 parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.4 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database.",
"id": "GHSA-mjv9-fw9q-98gx",
"modified": "2025-03-15T09:30:18Z",
"published": "2025-03-15T09:30:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-25222"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-responsive-thumbnail-slider/tags/1.0.4/wp-responsive-images-thumbnail-slider.php#L1326"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-responsive-thumbnail-slider/tags/1.0.5/wp-responsive-images-thumbnail-slider.php"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wordpress.org/plugins/wp-responsive-thumbnail-slider"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/f6023483-3fa5-4b85-9422-7d395abcfbd8?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJW2-V2HM-WJ34
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-18 01:07 – Updated: 2026-05-08 21:46Summary
The DuckDB, Snowflake, BigQuery, and DeltaLake I/O managers constructed SQL WHERE clauses by interpolating dynamic partition key values into queries without escaping. A user with the Add Dynamic Partitions permission could create a partition key that injects arbitrary SQL, which would execute against the target database backend under the I/O manager's credentials.
Only deployments that use dynamic partitions are affected. Pipelines using static or time-window partitions are not impacted.
Impact
Dagster OSS: Any user with access to the Dagster API can create dynamic partition keys. Organizations should assess exposure based on who has API access in their deployment. Dagster is typically deployed in trusted environments where users who can manage partitions already have equivalent database access through other means.
Dagster+: In most Dagster+ deployments using default permission sets, the Add Dynamic Partitions permission is granted to users with an Editor role or above, who typically already have the ability to modify the affected tables and the asset code that accesses them.
The vulnerability is most relevant in deployments where this permission has been granted independently of broader database access, such as certain multi-tenant or custom RBAC configurations. In those cases, an affected user could read or modify data within the databases accessible to the I/O manager, beyond what their role would otherwise permit. Organizations should review which users hold this permission and assess their exposure accordingly.
Remediation
Update to the patched versions listed above. No configuration changes or workarounds are required alongside the update. Only your Dagster code version needs to be updated; the Dagster+ agent/Dagster OSS daemon/webserver do not need to be updated.
The fix ensures that partition key values are properly escaped before inclusion in SQL queries across all affected I/O managers.
If you are unable to apply the update, manual workarounds are described here.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster-duckdb"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.29.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster-snowflake"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.29.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster-gcp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.29.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.13.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.13.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster-deltalake"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.29.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "dagster-snowflake-polars"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.29.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-41490"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-18T01:07:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-07T14:16:02Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe DuckDB, Snowflake, BigQuery, and DeltaLake I/O managers constructed SQL WHERE clauses by interpolating dynamic partition key values into queries without escaping. A user with the `Add Dynamic Partitions` permission could create a partition key that injects arbitrary SQL, which would execute against the target database backend under the I/O manager\u0027s credentials.\n\nOnly deployments that use dynamic partitions are affected. Pipelines using static or time-window partitions are not impacted.\n\n### Impact\n\n**Dagster OSS**: Any user with access to the Dagster API can create dynamic partition keys. Organizations should assess exposure based on who has API access in their deployment. Dagster is typically deployed in trusted environments where users who can manage partitions already have equivalent database access through other means. \n\n**Dagster+**: In most Dagster+ deployments using default permission sets, the `Add Dynamic Partitions` permission is granted to users with an Editor role or above, who typically already have the ability to modify the affected tables and the asset code that accesses them.\n\nThe vulnerability is most relevant in deployments where this permission has been granted independently of broader database access, such as certain multi-tenant or custom RBAC configurations. In those cases, an affected user could read or modify data within the databases accessible to the I/O manager, beyond what their role would otherwise permit. Organizations should review which users hold this permission and assess their exposure accordingly.\n\n### Remediation\n\n**Update to the patched versions listed above.** No configuration changes or workarounds are required alongside the update. Only your Dagster code version needs to be updated; the Dagster+ agent/Dagster OSS daemon/webserver do not need to be updated.\n\nThe fix ensures that partition key values are properly escaped before inclusion in SQL queries across all affected I/O managers.\n\nIf you are unable to apply the update, manual workarounds are described [here](https://gist.github.com/gibsondan/6d0c483f8499a8b1cd460cddc9fd8f72).",
"id": "GHSA-mjw2-v2hm-wj34",
"modified": "2026-05-08T21:46:57Z",
"published": "2026-04-18T01:07:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/dagster-io/dagster/security/advisories/GHSA-mjw2-v2hm-wj34"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41490"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gist.github.com/gibsondan/6d0c483f8499a8b1cd460cddc9fd8f72"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/dagster-io/dagster"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/dagster-io/dagster/releases/tag/1.13.1"
}
],
"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:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Dagster Vulnerable to SQL Injection via Dynamic Partition Keys in Database I/O Manager Integrations"
}
GHSA-MJW4-35M8-H2P3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 02:37 – Updated: 2022-05-14 02:37SQL injection vulnerability in interface/de_identification_forms/find_code_popup.php in versions of OpenEMR before 5.0.1.4 allows a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the 'search_term' parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-15151"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-08-15T17:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "SQL injection vulnerability in interface/de_identification_forms/find_code_popup.php in versions of OpenEMR before 5.0.1.4 allows a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the \u0027search_term\u0027 parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-mjw4-35m8-h2p3",
"modified": "2022-05-14T02:37:12Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T02:37:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-15151"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/openemr/openemr/pull/1757/files"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://insecurity.sh/reports/openemr.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.databreaches.net/openemr-patches-serious-vulnerabilities-uncovered-by-project-insecurity"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/OpenEMR_Patches"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJW6-X6PV-6Q3X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-17 12:31 – Updated: 2026-02-17 12:31SQL injection vulnerability (SQLi) in Clicldeu SaaS, specifically in the generation of reports, which occurs when a previously authenticated remote attacker executes a malicious payload in the URL generated after downloading the student's report card in the ‘Day-to-day’ section from the mobile application.
In the URL of the generated PDF, the session token used does not expire, so it remains valid for days after its generation, and unusual characters can be entered after the ‘id_alu’ parameter, resulting in two types of SQLi: boolean-based blind and time-based blind. Exploiting this vulnerability could allow an attacker to access confidential information in the database.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-2247"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-17T12:16:15Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "SQL injection vulnerability (SQLi) in Clicldeu SaaS, specifically in the generation of reports, which occurs when a previously authenticated remote attacker executes a malicious payload in the URL generated after downloading the student\u0027s report card in the \u2018Day-to-day\u2019 section from the mobile application.\n\nIn the URL of the generated PDF, the session token used does not expire, so it remains valid for days after its generation, and unusual characters can be entered after the \u2018id_alu\u2019 parameter, resulting in two types of SQLi: boolean-based blind and time-based blind. Exploiting this vulnerability could allow an attacker to access confidential information in the database.",
"id": "GHSA-mjw6-x6pv-6q3x",
"modified": "2026-02-17T12:31:07Z",
"published": "2026-02-17T12:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-2247"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/aviso/sql-injection-clickedus-saas-platform"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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-MJW7-2XRM-8VGM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-25 09:32 – Updated: 2025-02-25 09:32The Yawave plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'lbid' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 2.9.1 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-1648"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-25T07:15:18Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Yawave plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the \u0027lbid\u0027 parameter in all versions up to, and including, 2.9.1 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database.",
"id": "GHSA-mjw7-2xrm-8vgm",
"modified": "2025-02-25T09:32:34Z",
"published": "2025-02-25T09:32:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-1648"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://atviksecurity.com/yawave-wordpress-plugin-unauthenticated-sql-injection"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/yawave/trunk/includes/shortcode.liveblog.php#L69"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/6a5cc21a-eb3a-429a-a0f9-0181d95a9eeb?source=cve"
}
],
"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-MJW8-4R4W-CJ9R
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-23 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:35Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability in LETSCMS MLM Software Binary MLM Plan allows SQL Injection. This issue affects Binary MLM Plan: from n/a through 3.0.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-47671"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-23T13:15:42Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027) vulnerability in LETSCMS MLM Software Binary MLM Plan allows SQL Injection. This issue affects Binary MLM Plan: from n/a through 3.0.",
"id": "GHSA-mjw8-4r4w-cj9r",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:35:16Z",
"published": "2025-05-23T15:31:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-47671"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/binary-mlm-plan/vulnerability/wordpress-binary-mlm-plan-3-0-sql-injection-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJWW-WWFV-999V
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-01-04 00:00 – Updated: 2022-01-12 00:01The Speed Booster Pack âš¡ PageSpeed Optimization Suite WordPress plugin before 4.3.3.1 does not escape the sbp_convert_table_name parameter before using it in a SQL statement to convert the related table, leading to an SQL injection
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-25023"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-89"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-01-03T13:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Speed Booster Pack \u00e2\u0161\u00a1 PageSpeed Optimization Suite WordPress plugin before 4.3.3.1 does not escape the sbp_convert_table_name parameter before using it in a SQL statement to convert the related table, leading to an SQL injection",
"id": "GHSA-mjww-wwfv-999v",
"modified": "2022-01-12T00:01:48Z",
"published": "2022-01-04T00:00:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-25023"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/4a27d374-f690-4a8a-987a-9e0f56bbe143"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
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.