CVE-2022-23305: SQL injection in JDBC Appender in Apache Log4j V1
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 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.
Security readout for executives and security teams
This is a critical SQL injection risk in Apache Log4j 1.x, but only when an application uses the non-default JDBCAppender to write logs to a database. If attacker-controlled input is logged, crafted content can alter the configured SQL statement. Log4j 1.x is end-of-life, so replacement is the durable fix. Exposure is limited to systems running Apache Log4j 1.x with JDBCAppender explicitly configured. The component is not enabled by default. Risk rises when applications log external input into database-backed logs using PatternLayout message conversion. Treat as high-priority for legacy Java estates, especially applications writing logs to databases. The practical urgency depends on whether JDBCAppender is configured. Because Log4j 1.x is unsupported and has multiple known issues, plan replacement rather than narrow exception handling. Mitigation focus: Inventory applications and vendor products for Apache Log4j 1.x usage.; Check whether JDBCAppender is configured; prioritize those systems first.; Upgrade from Log4j 1.x to a supported Log4j 2 release..
Prepared
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Potential ATT&CK relevance
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
cwe · medium confidence lookup
CWE-89: Database access and collection lookup
Injection into data stores can inform collection, data access, and exfiltration detection reviews. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
The CVE wording references database injection or access, so collection and exfiltration review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
1CVSS vectors
3Timeline events
2ADP providers
6Source links
SSVC decision data
CISA-ADPCISA Coordinator
Timestamp
Version
2.0.3
Exploitation: noneAutomatable: yesTechnical Impact: total
CVSS vector scores
1 official score
We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
CWE-89 · source CWE mapping
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.