CVE-2022-48599
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 · uneditedA SQL injection vulnerability exists in the “reporter events type” feature of the ScienceLogic SL1 that takes unsanitized user‐controlled input and passes it directly to a SQL query. This allows for the injection of arbitrary SQL before being executed against the database.
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 ScienceLogic SL1's 'reporter events type' feature allows attackers to inject arbitrary SQL commands through unsanitized user-controlled input that is directly concatenated into SQL queries without proper parameterization or escaping.
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<= 11.1.2CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 if ScienceLogic SL1 is installedLocate the ScienceLogic SL1 installation in your environment - check for SL1 processes, services, or the product installation directory.Affected if ScienceLogic SL1 is present in the environment
-
Determine the installed SL1 versionAccess the SL1 administrative interface or use the system information command provided by SL1 to retrieve the exact version number.Affected if The installed version is 11.1.2 or any earlier version
-
Verify the reporter events type feature existsLocate the 'reporter events type' feature within the SL1 administrative console or by examining the application's feature list and module configuration.Affected if The 'reporter events type' feature is present and enabled in the installation
-
Check database query logs for suspicious patternsExamine database logs or audit logs for queries containing unusual SQL syntax, UNION statements, or unexpected characters in the reporter events type functionality.Affected if Logs show SQL queries with unsanitized user input or suspicious SQL injection patterns
-
Review application access logs for the reporter events type endpointCheck web server or application logs for requests to the reporter events type feature that contain SQL meta-characters in parameters.Affected if Access logs show requests with SQL operators or unusual characters being passed to the reporter events type feature
A user is affected if they are running ScienceLogic SL1 version 11.1.2 or lower and the 'reporter events type' feature is accessible in their environment.
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.
From vendor dataImplement parameterized queries (prepared statements) for all database operations in the reporter events type feature, or implement robust input validation and escaping routines before passing user input to SQL queries.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-48599 — 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-2022-48599 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