VulnerabilityPublished 20 Sep 2022Updated 29 May 2025

CVE-2022-3242: microweber/microweber · Code Injection

Affects microweber/microweberSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · public detection template (Nuclei) · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.3.2 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 80% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.3.2

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Sep 2022
Detectable: evidence found.
nuclei template: Microweber <1.3.2 - Cross-Site Scripting
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade microweber/microweber to 1.3.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubmicroweber/microweber`pkg:github/microweber/microweber`Other threats	Affected <1.3.2	Fixed in 1.3.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade microweber installations to version 1.3.2 or later, where this vulnerability has been addressed. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, organizations should implement strict input validation and sanitization on all user-supplied data, especially any content that could be interpreted as code. Employing web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious code injection patterns can provide an additional layer of defense. User training to recognize phishing and social engineering attempts is critical to reduce the risk of exploitation requiring user interaction. Regular security audits and code reviews of custom plugins or extensions for microweber should be conducted to identify and remediate similar injection risks. Monitoring application logs for unusual activity related to code execution attempts can help detect exploitation attempts early. Finally, organizations should maintain an incident response plan tailored to web application attacks to respond promptly if exploitation is suspected.

Description

Code Injection in GitHub repository microweber/microweber prior to 1.3.2.

Impact

For European organizations using microweber as their CMS or website builder, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily related to confidentiality breaches. Attackers could exploit the code injection flaw to access sensitive data or manipulate content, potentially damaging the organization's reputation and violating data protection regulations such as GDPR. Since the vulnerability requires user interaction, phishing or social engineering campaigns could be used to exploit it, increasing the risk for organizations with less security-aware users. The lack of impact on integrity and availability reduces the risk of service disruption or data tampering directly from this vulnerability. However, the presence of code injection vulnerabilities can be a stepping stone for more severe attacks, especially if combined with other vulnerabilities or poor security practices. European organizations in sectors with high compliance requirements (e.g., finance, healthcare, government) should be particularly cautious, as even limited confidentiality leaks can have significant regulatory and financial consequences.

CWE-94Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #10OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
Architecture and Design
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product.
Implementation · Input Validation
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating User-Controlled Variables (opens in a new tab)
Code Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 02:40 UTC

Public exploits and detectiona Nuclei detection template

WeaknessesCWE-94

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats