Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2022-23305 is a critical-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Oracle Business Intelligence. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 0.8% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
The vulnerability is a SQL injection flaw (CWE-89) in the JDBCAppender component of Apache Log4j 1.2.x. By design, the appender accepts an SQL statement containing PatternLayout converters such as %m as a configuration parameter; when an application logs attacker-controlled data from inputs or headers, the converter values are inserted directly into the query without parameterization. The issue is present only when JDBCAppender is explicitly configured, which is not the default, and Log4j 1.2 reached end-of-life in August 2015.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply crafted strings through any application input that is subsequently logged, causing the JDBCAppender to execute arbitrary SQL statements against the configured database. Successful exploitation can result in full read, write, or delete access to database contents, corresponding to the CVSS 9.8 rating.
Advisories from Apache, Oracle, and NetApp state that users should migrate to Log4j 2, which re-introduced the JDBCAppender in 2.0-beta8 with support for parameterized SQL and column-level customization. The references further note that Log4j 1.2 is unsupported and that organizations still running the 1.x line should treat any JDBCAppender configuration as requiring immediate remediation.
EPSS currently stands at 0.0945 after peaking at 0.1156.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2022-0477
Vulnerability Data
By design, the JDBCAppender in Log4j 1.2.x accepts an SQL statement as a configuration parameter where the values to be inserted are converters from PatternLayout. The message converter, %m, is likely to always be included. This allows attackers to manipulate…
more
the SQL by entering crafted strings into input fields or headers of an application that are logged allowing unintended SQL queries to be executed. Note this issue only affects Log4j 1.x when specifically configured to use the JDBCAppender, which is not the default. Beginning in version 2.0-beta8, the JDBCAppender was re-introduced with proper support for parameterized SQL queries and further customization over the columns written to in logs. Apache Log4j 1.2 reached end of life in August 2015. Users should upgrade to Log4j 2 as it addresses numerous other issues from the previous versions.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
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.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.