VulnerabilityPublished 4 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-47911: sonarqube · SQL Injection

Affects sonarqubeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.7 Medium : upgrade to 10.6 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.7Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 38% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 10.6

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

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

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

Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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).
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 4 Oct 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
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 org.sonarsource.sonarqube/sonarqube to 10.6.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Mavenorg.sonarsource.sonarqube/sonarqube`pkg:maven/org.sonarsource.sonarqube/sonarqube`Other threats	Affected <10.6	Fixed in 10.6

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should upgrade SonarQube installations to version 10.6 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed. Until upgrading is possible, restrict administrator access strictly to trusted personnel and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of credential compromise. Conduct regular audits of administrator accounts and monitor API usage logs for suspicious activity related to the authorizations/group-memberships endpoint. Implement network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of the SonarQube server to only necessary internal networks. Review and harden database permissions to minimize potential damage from SQL injection attacks. Additionally, consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block SQL injection patterns targeting the affected API endpoint. Educate administrators on the risks of privilege misuse and ensure timely application of security patches.

Description

In SonarSource SonarQube 10.4 through 10.5 before 10.6, a vulnerability was discovered in the authorizations/group-memberships API endpoint that allows SonarQube users with the administrator role to inject blind SQL commands.

Impact

The vulnerability allows an attacker with administrator privileges to perform blind SQL injection attacks, potentially leading to unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of database contents, or disruption of authorization mechanisms within SonarQube. This can compromise the integrity of code quality and security reports, mislead developers, and undermine trust in the development pipeline. Organizations using affected SonarQube versions risk exposure of confidential project data and user information stored in the platform. Since SonarQube is integral to many software development workflows, exploitation could indirectly affect software supply chain security. The requirement for administrator privileges reduces the likelihood of external attackers exploiting this vulnerability directly but raises concerns about insider threats or compromised admin accounts. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests limited active exploitation currently, but the medium severity and potential impact warrant prompt remediation.

CWE-89Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #2OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

sonarsource.atlassian.net/browse/SONAR-22340 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 07:34 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-89

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats