dbcve.org
BatikApplication · Apache

CVE-2022-38398

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-09-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Batik of Apache XML Graphics allows an attacker to load a url thru the jar protocol. This issue affects Apache XML Graphics Batik 1.14.

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 · moderate confidence

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Apache XML Graphics Batik allows attackers to load arbitrary URLs through the jar protocol. This could enable access to internal resources, services, or local network endpoints that should not be exposed.

MitigationUpdate Apache XML Graphics Batik to a patched version (1.14 or later with fix), or implement URL validation/allowlist filtering to restrict accessible protocols and domains before passing URLs to Batik processing.

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
BatikApplication
Affected:= 1.14
Debian LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 10.0

CVSS 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
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Apache Batik library version
    Locate the batik JAR file in your application classpath or dependencies (typically named batik-*.jar) and check its version metadata, or run: jar -xf batik-[name].jar META-INF/MANIFEST.MF && grep Implementation-Version META-INF/MANIFEST.MF
    Affected if The version is exactly 1.14 (no patch applied)
  2. Check Debian system package version
    On Debian 10 systems, run: dpkg -l | grep -i batik or apt-cache policy libbatik-java
    Affected if The installed package version is exactly 1.14-2 (the vulnerable version)
  3. Determine if Batik processes SVG content
    Review your application code to identify if Batik's SVG handling classes (such as SVGGraphics2D, SVGReader, or Transcoder) are used to parse SVG files or SVG data from external or untrusted sources
    Affected if Batik is used to process SVG files, especially from user-supplied or external sources
  4. Inspect if jar protocol URLs can reach Batik
    Check whether your application or service allows SVG content to be processed from URLs (via ImageIO, URLConnection, or Batik's URIResolver) where a malicious actor could embed jar:// URLs
    Affected if SVG processing accepts URLs from untrusted input without validation, allowing jar:// protocol strings to be passed to Batik
  5. Verify URL input validation exists
    Search your codebase for URL validation, allowlisting, or sanitization logic before passing URLs to Batik's processing methods, specifically checking for protocol restrictions that would block jar://
    Affected if No URL validation is performed, or jar:// protocol is not explicitly blocked, before passing URLs to Batik

You are affected if you run Apache Batik version 1.14 and your application passes unvalidated URLs (potentially containing jar:// protocol) to Batik for SVG processing, allowing attackers to access internal resources through the SSRF flaw.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Update Apache XML Graphics Batik to a patched version (1.14 or later with fix), or implement URL validation/allowlist filtering to restrict accessible protocols and domains before passing URLs to Batik processing.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Batik 1.15 or later

  1. 1. Identify all applications and dependencies that use Apache Batik version 1.14
  2. 2. Upgrade Batik to version 1.15 or later, which contains the fix for the SSRF vulnerability via jar protocol
  3. 3. Rebuild and redeploy any applications that depend on Batik
  4. 4. Verify the upgrade by testing that the jar protocol URL loading is properly restricted
  5. 5. Scan for any other instances of Batik 1.14 in your environment to ensure complete remediation
Caveat Review release notes for any deprecated APIs or behavioral changes between 1.14 and the target upgrade version

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Batik Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-38398 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-38398 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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