CWE · MITRE source
CWE-943Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Data Query Logic
The product generates a query intended to access or manipulate data in a data store such as a database, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that can modify the intended logic of the query.
Depending on the capabilities of the query language, an attacker could inject additional logic into the query to: The ability to execute additional commands or change which entities are returned has obvious risks. But when the product logic depends on the order or number of entities, this can also lead to vulnerabilities. For example, if the query expects to return only one entity that specifies an administrative user, but an attacker can change which entities are returned, this could cause the logic to return information for a regular user and incorrectly assume that the user has administrative privileges. While this weakness is most commonly associated with SQL injection, there are many other query languages that are also subject to injection attacks, including HTSQL, LDAP, DQL, XQuery, Xpath, and "NoSQL" languages.
Last updated: 22 August 2026 14:14 UTC
Cumulative inbound coverage
How completely the frameworks we cross-walk collectively cover this — the verdict is the strongest single mapping (overlapping partials are not summed); breadth shows the corroboration behind it.
Collective: partial · 1 mapping(s) from 1 framework(s): CAPEC 1 (partial)
Control responseHuman-reviewed
Answering this weakness across the control lifecycle, from our framework cross-walks.
—
—
—
NIST 800-53 r5 controls that address this weakness (0)AI-assisted
| Control | Title | Family | Why it addresses this CWE |
|---|---|---|---|
| No NIST controls proposed yet. | |||
Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority
| CVE | Risk | CVSS | EPSS | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2020-36195 UPD | 7.6 | 9.8 | 0.0176 | 2021-04-17 |
CVE-2026-32248 | 7.4 | 9.8 | 0.0063 | 2026-03-12 |
CVE-2026-40351 UPD | 7.4 | 9.8 | 0.0063 | 2026-04-17 |
CVE-2017-12904 UPD | 7.3 | 8.8 | 0.0640 | 2017-08-23 |
CVE-2026-29793 UPD | 7.3 | 9.8 | 0.0046 | 2026-03-10 |
CVE-2026-41274 UPD | 7.3 | 9.8 | 0.0050 | 2026-04-23 |
CVE-2026-54350 | 7.3 | 10.0 | 0.0047 | 2026-06-26 |
CVE-2022-36084 UPD | 7.2 | 9.9 | 0.0119 | 2022-09-08 |
CVE-2024-4872 UPD | 7.0 | 9.9 | 0.0050 | 2024-08-27 |
CVE-2026-40141 | 7.0 | 9.9 | 0.0049 | 2026-07-06 |
CVE-2018-7829 UPD | 6.9 | 8.8 | 0.0172 | 2019-05-22 |
CVE-2026-41327 | 6.9 | 9.1 | 0.0050 | 2026-04-24 |
CVE-2026-41328 | 6.8 | 9.1 | 0.0041 | 2026-04-24 |
CVE-2026-45688 | 6.8 | 9.1 | 0.0029 | 2026-06-24 |
CVE-2026-45689 | 6.8 | 9.1 | 0.0031 | 2026-06-24 |
CVE-2026-25513 UPD | 6.6 | 8.8 | 0.0047 | 2026-02-04 |
CVE-2026-25514 UPD | 6.6 | 8.8 | 0.0047 | 2026-02-04 |
CVE-2026-3023 | 6.5 | 8.8 | 0.0033 | 2026-03-16 |
CVE-2026-40352 UPD | 6.5 | 8.8 | 0.0038 | 2026-04-17 |
CVE-2026-76316 | 6.5 | 8.8 | 0.0030 | 2026-08-19 |
CVE-2026-47835 | 6.4 | 8.6 | 0.0030 | 2026-06-15 |
CVE-2026-63637 | 6.4 | 8.6 | 0.0024 | 2026-08-06 |
CVE-2025-24787 UPD | 6.3 | 8.6 | 0.0055 | 2025-02-06 |
CVE-2026-33980 UPD | 6.3 | 8.3 | 0.0040 | 2026-03-27 |
CVE-2026-46591 | 6.2 | 8.2 | 0.0033 | 2026-07-06 |