Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-33852

SQLi in Ibm Security Guardium 11.4

Published
27 August 2023
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.6
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0043 35th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-33852 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Ibm Security Guardium. Its CVSS base score is 7.6 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 35th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

IBM Security Guardium 11.4 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 257614.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-40689Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2023-25684Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2023-38724Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2023-23470Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2023-27871Same vendor: Ibm
CVE-2024-6216Shared CWE-89
CVE-2023-39526Shared CWE-89
CVE-2023-45376Shared CWE-89
CVE-2024-36683Shared CWE-89
CVE-2023-1566Shared CWE-89

Affected Assets

ibm
security guardium
11.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • 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.

addresses: CWE-89

Penetration testing uses SQL injection payloads against database interfaces, identifying and supporting fixes for SQL injection weaknesses.

addresses: CWE-89

Validates query inputs to prevent SQL syntax or command manipulation.

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 mostly match
prevents

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.

PR.AT-02 partial match
prevents

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.

detects

The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.

prevents

Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.

prevents

Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.

prevents

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.

prevents

Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.

References