CVE-2022-29059
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn improper neutralization of special elements used in an SQL command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability [CWE-89] in FortiWeb version 7.0.1 and below, 6.4.2 and below, 6.3.20 and below, 6.2.7 and below may allow a privileged attacker to execute SQL commands over the log database via specifically crafted strings parameters.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in FortiWeb's log database allows a privileged attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands via crafted string parameters. The flaw exists in versions 7.0.1 and below, 6.4.2 and below, 6.3.20 and below, and 6.2.7 and below, stemming from improper neutralization of special elements in SQL queries.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 6.2.3, <= 6.2.7>= 6.3.0, <= 6.3.18>= 6.4.0, <= 6.4.2>= 7.0.0, < 7.0.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify FortiWeb versionRun CLI command: get system status or check System > Settings in the web UI to view the firmware versionAffected if Version is 6.2.3-6.2.7, 6.3.0-6.3.18, 6.4.0-6.4.2, or 7.0.0-7.0.1
-
Confirm log database feature is configuredCheck if FortiWeb log database is enabled via CLI: get log {type} or navigate to Log > Log Config in the web UIAffected if Log database feature is active and receiving logs
-
Review administrative access logsAudit privileged user accounts with access to log database via CLI: diagnose system admin list or check Log Access settings for recent loginsAffected if Multiple or unauthorized accounts have privileged administrative access to the log database
-
Inspect log database queriesSearch FortiWeb logs for suspicious SQL syntax patterns such as UNION, SELECT, DROP, or unexpected semicolons in log search queriesAffected if Unusual SQL-like commands appear in log search or audit logs
You are affected if your FortiWeb version falls within 6.2.3-6.2.7, 6.3.0-6.3.18, 6.4.0-6.4.2, or 7.0.0-7.0.1 and the log database feature is accessible to privileged users.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped7.0.2
Upgrade FortiWeb to version 7.0.2, 6.4.3, 6.3.21, or 6.2.8 or later per vendor advisories. Limit administrative access and monitor for suspicious log database queries as interim controls.
FortiWeb 7.0.2 or later (7.0.x branch recommended; 6.4.x and earlier branches are End of Life)
- 1. Identify the current FortiWeb version via Web UI (System > Status) or CLI: 'get system status'
- 2. Based on your current version branch, plan upgrade path: For 7.0.x, upgrade to 7.0.2 or later; for 6.4.x, upgrade to 7.0.2 or later (6.4.x is EOL); for 6.3.x, upgrade to 7.0.2 or later (6.3.x is EOL); for 6.2.x, upgrade to 7.0.2 or later (6.2.x is EOL)
- 3. Backup FortiWeb configuration via Web UI (System > Maintenance > Backup & Restore) or CLI: 'execute backup full-config'
- 4. Download the firmware upgrade from Fortinet Customer Support portal (https://support.fortinet.com)
- 5. Upload and install the firmware via Web UI (System > Maintenance > Firmware) or CLI: 'execute system firmware upgrade'
- 6. After upgrade, verify version: 'get system status' to confirm running fixed version
- 7. Test that FortiWeb functionality (especially logging and SQL-related features) operates normally
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-29059 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-29059 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data