CVE-2022-22963
RCE in Oracle Communications Cloud Native Core Network Function Cloud Native Environment 1.10.0 … 22.1.2
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2022-22963 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Oracle Communications Cloud Native Core Network Function Cloud Native Environment. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 0.0% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2022-22963 is a remote code execution vulnerability affecting Spring Cloud Function versions 3.1.6, 3.2.2, and older unsupported releases. It occurs in the routing functionality when an attacker supplies a malicious Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expression as the routing-expression, which is then evaluated without adequate restrictions. The flaw is tracked under CWE-94 and CWE-917 and carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the issue over the network by sending a crafted HTTP request containing the malicious SpEL payload. Successful exploitation grants arbitrary code execution on the server and access to local resources, with no user interaction or privileges required.
Public advisories from VMware Tanzu, Oracle, Cisco, and SonicWall describe the affected versions and direct users to upgrade to patched releases of Spring Cloud Function. Additional technical details and indicators are referenced in security bulletins linked from those vendors.
The CVE maintains very high EPSS scores, with a current value of 0.9446 and a recorded peak of 0.9755; public exploit code has also been posted to sites such as PacketStorm.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2022-1654
Vulnerability Data
In Spring Cloud Function versions 3.1.6, 3.2.2 and older unsupported versions, when using routing functionality it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL as a routing-expression that may result in remote code execution and access to…
more
local resources.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 25 August 2022
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.3.2V1.3.5V4.3.1
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Makes persistent code injection into loaded programs impossible when the executable image itself resides on hardware-protected read-only media.
Dynamically generated code can be produced and executed inside the isolated chamber, preventing host compromise from code-injection payloads.
Validates inputs used in dynamic code generation to block injected directives.
Directly prevents execution of attacker-supplied code written into data memory regions.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect EL injection but does not itself implement the fix.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent expression-language injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including EL injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.