Description
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.
SQL Injection Explained
Read our in-depth guide on exploiting and mitigating this weakness
Potential Impact
Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Confidentiality
Read Application Data
Authentication
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Bypass Protection Mechanism
Access Control
Bypass Protection Mechanism
Integrity
Modify Application Data
Demonstrative Examples
...string userName = ctx.getAuthenticatedUserName();string query = "SELECT * FROM items WHERE owner = '" + userName + "' AND itemname = '" + ItemName.Text + "'";sda = new SqlDataAdapter(query, conn);DataTable dt = new DataTable();sda.Fill(dt);...SELECT * FROM items WHERE owner = <userName> AND itemname = <itemName>;name' OR 'a'='aSELECT * FROM items WHERE owner = 'wiley' AND itemname = 'name' OR 'a'='a';OR 'a'='aSELECT * FROM items;name'; DELETE FROM items; --SELECT * FROM items WHERE owner = 'wiley' AND itemname = 'name';DELETE FROM items;
--'name'; DELETE FROM items; SELECT * FROM items WHERE 'a'='aSELECT * FROM items WHERE owner = 'wiley' AND itemname = 'name';DELETE FROM items;SELECT * FROM items WHERE 'a'='a';procedure get_item ( itm_cv IN OUT ItmCurTyp, usr in varchar2, itm in varchar2)is open itm_cv for' SELECT * FROM items WHERE ' || 'owner = '|| usr || ' AND itemname = ' || itm || ';end get_item;SELECT ITEM,PRICE FROM PRODUCT WHERE ITEM_CATEGORY='$user_input' ORDER BY PRICE'; exec master..xp_cmdshell 'dir' --SELECT ITEM,PRICE FROM PRODUCT WHERE ITEM_CATEGORY=''; exec master..xp_cmdshell 'dir' --' ORDER BY PRICEMitigations & Prevention
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.
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 typi
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 princ
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.
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 qu
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 relat
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.
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
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.
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.
Detection Methods
- Automated Static Analysis — This weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives. Automated static analysis might not be able to recognize when proper input validation is b
- Automated Dynamic Analysis Moderate — This weakness can be detected using dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the software using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The software's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash
- Manual Analysis — Manual analysis can be useful for finding this weakness, but it might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. This becomes difficult for weaknesses that must be considered for all inputs, since the attack surface can be too large.
- Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode High — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
- Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation High — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
- Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation SOAR Partial — According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Real-World CVE Examples
| CVE ID | Description |
|---|---|
| CVE-2024-6847 | SQL injection in AI chatbot via a conversation message |
| CVE-2025-26794 | SQL injection in e-mail agent through SQLite integration |
| CVE-2023-32530 | SQL injection in security product dashboard using crafted certificate fields |
| CVE-2021-42258 | SQL injection in time and billing software, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. |
| CVE-2021-27101 | SQL injection in file-transfer system via a crafted Host header, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. |
| CVE-2020-12271 | SQL injection in firewall product's admin interface or user portal, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. |
| CVE-2019-3792 | An automation system written in Go contains an API that is vulnerable to SQL injection allowing the attacker to read privileged data. |
| CVE-2004-0366 | chain: SQL injection in library intended for database authentication allows SQL injection and authentication bypass. |
| CVE-2008-2790 | SQL injection through an ID that was supposed to be numeric. |
| CVE-2008-2223 | SQL injection through an ID that was supposed to be numeric. |
| CVE-2007-6602 | SQL injection via user name. |
| CVE-2008-5817 | SQL injection via user name or password fields. |
| CVE-2003-0377 | SQL injection in security product, using a crafted group name. |
| CVE-2008-2380 | SQL injection in authentication library. |
| CVE-2017-11508 | SQL injection in vulnerability management and reporting tool, using a crafted password. |
Related Weaknesses
Taxonomy Mappings
- PLOVER: — SQL injection
- 7 Pernicious Kingdoms: — SQL Injection
- CLASP: — SQL injection
- OWASP Top Ten 2007: A2 — Injection Flaws
- OWASP Top Ten 2004: A1 — Unvalidated Input
- OWASP Top Ten 2004: A6 — Injection Flaws
- WASC: 19 — SQL Injection
- Software Fault Patterns: SFP24 — Tainted input to command
- OMG ASCSM: ASCSM-CWE-89 —
- SEI CERT Oracle Coding Standard for Java: IDS00-J — Prevent SQL injection
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CWE-89?
CWE-89 (Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')) is a software weakness identified by MITRE's Common Weakness Enumeration. It is classified as a Base-level weakness. 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 mod...
How can CWE-89 be exploited?
Attackers can exploit CWE-89 (Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')) to execute unauthorized code or commands. This weakness is typically introduced during the Implementation, Implementation phase of software development.
How do I prevent CWE-89?
Key mitigations include: 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
What is the severity of CWE-89?
CWE-89 is classified as a Base-level weakness (Medium abstraction). It has been observed in 15 real-world CVEs.