BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2022
CVE-2022-38398High confidence

Server-Side Request Forgery Information Disclosure Vulnerability

Apache Software Foundation · Apache XML Graphics

5.3MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 2.57% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Apache Software Foundation Apache XML Graphics and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

5 package states
Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcebatikVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.15+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcebatikVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.15+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcebatikVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.15+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcebatikVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.1.15+dfsg-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivebatikUnder evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Open-source package ranges2 source-attributed ranges

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
mavenorg.apache.xmlgraphics:batik>= 1.14, < 1.151.15GitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 3 Nov 2025
mavenorg.apache.xmlgraphics:batik-bridge>= 1.14, < 1.151.15GitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 3 Nov 2025
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2022-38398 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitybatik: Server-Side Request Forgery
8 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat build of Quarkus
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat Decision Manager 7
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat Integration Camel K 1
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat Integration Camel Quarkus 1
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat JBoss Data Grid 7
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat JBoss Fuse 6
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat JBoss Fuse Service Works 6
  • batik.src as a component of Red Hat Process Automation 7
Summary
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.
Remediation
Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2022-6776

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

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.

What

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.

Why

The server follows an attacker-influenced destination, allowing requests to systems or services the attacker cannot reach directly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

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.

Why

The server follows an attacker-influenced destination, allowing requests to systems or services the attacker cannot reach directly.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-918 ↗

CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-918
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2023-1142Red Hat Integration Camel for Spring Boot: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein entfernter, anonymer Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Red Hat Integration Camel for Spring Boot ausnutzen, um die Vertraulichkeit, Verfügbarkeit und Integrität zu gefährden.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2023-0881IBM Maximo Asset Management: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen Offenlegung von Informationen

Ein entfernter, anonymer Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in IBM Maximo Asset Management ausnutzen, um Informationen offenzulegen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20220928Security Bulletin 28 Sep 2022

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 28 Sep 2022, published on 28 September 2022. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0661Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Splunk

ecord?id=CVE-2021-21409 Référence CVE CVE-2021-23413 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-23413 Référence CVE CVE-2021-37136 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-37136 Référence CVE CVE-2021-37137 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-37137 Référence CVE CVE-2021-4189 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-4189 Référence CVE CVE-2021-42550 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-42550 Référence CVE CVE-2021-43797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-43797 Référence CVE CVE-2022-0391 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-0391 Référence CVE CVE-2022-24823 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-24823 Référence CVE CVE-2022-38398 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-38398 Référence CVE CVE-2022-38648 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-38648 Référence CVE CVE-2022-40146 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-40146 Référence CVE CVE-2022-41704 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-41704 Référence CVE CVE-2022-41881 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-41881 Référence CVE CVE-2022-42004 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-42004 Référence CVE CVE-2022-42890 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-42890 Référence CVE CVE-2022-45061 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-45061 Référence CVE CVE-2022-48285 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2022-017598Apache Software Foundation の Apache Batik におけるサーバサイドのリクエストフォージェリの脆弱性

Apache Software Foundation の Apache Batik には、サーバサイドのリクエストフォージェリの脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
Fixed
Action
Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 22 Sept 2022 · Last source change 3 Nov 2025, 19:27 UTC · CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-6776
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    Batik 1.14 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
    After
    Batik 1.14 · Fixed: Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata relevant to your system have been applied. For details on how to apply this update, refer to: https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
  2. Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.
    Before
    Awaiting fix
    After
    Patch available
    Red Hat Product Security ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-6776↗Red Hat Product Security security advisory↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2022-38398 · cve.blacktree.nl