CWE-245 Variante Brouillon

J2EE Bad Practices: Direct Management of Connections

This vulnerability occurs when a J2EE application handles database connections directly instead of using the container's built-in connection management system.

Définition

What is CWE-245?

This vulnerability occurs when a J2EE application handles database connections directly instead of using the container's built-in connection management system.
J2EE standards explicitly prohibit applications from managing their own database connections. Instead, developers must use the container's resource management facilities to obtain connections. Every major J2EE container provides robust, pooled connection management as part of its core framework—bypassing this system violates the platform's fundamental architecture. Recreating connection pooling within an application is both complex and prone to critical errors like connection leaks, improper cleanup, and performance bottlenecks. Using the container's proven management layer eliminates these risks while ensuring optimal resource utilization, which is precisely why direct connection management is considered a bad practice and security vulnerability.
Impact réel

Real-world CVEs caused by CWE-245

Aucune référence CVE publique n'est liée à ce CWE dans le catalogue MITRE pour le moment.

Comment les attaquants l'exploitent

Parcours de l'attaquant étape par étape

  1. 1

    Identifier un chemin de code qui traite des entrées non fiables sans validation.

  2. 2

    Élaborer une charge utile qui exploite le comportement non sécurisé — injection, traversal, débordement ou abus de logique.

  3. 3

    Délivrer la charge utile via une requête normale et observer la réaction de l'application.

  4. 4

    Itérer jusqu'à ce que la réponse divulgue des données, exécute le code de l'attaquant ou élève les privilèges.

Exemple de code vulnérable

Vulnerable Java

In the following example, the class DatabaseConnection opens and manages a connection to a database for a J2EE application. The method openDatabaseConnection opens a connection to the database using a DriverManager to create the Connection object conn to the database specified in the string constant CONNECT_STRING.

Vulnérable Java
public class DatabaseConnection {
  		private static final String CONNECT_STRING = "jdbc:mysql://localhost:3306/mysqldb";
  		private Connection conn = null;
  		public DatabaseConnection() {
  		}
  		public void openDatabaseConnection() {
  			try {
  				conn = DriverManager.getConnection(CONNECT_STRING);
  			} catch (SQLException ex) {...}
  		}
  		// Member functions for retrieving database connection and accessing database
  		...
  }
Exemple de code sécurisé

Secure Java

The use of the DriverManager class to directly manage the connection to the database violates the J2EE restriction against the direct management of connections. The J2EE application should use the web application container's resource management facilities to obtain a connection to the database as shown in the following example.

Sécurisé Java
public class DatabaseConnection {
  		private static final String DB_DATASRC_REF = "jdbc:mysql://localhost:3306/mysqldb";
  		private Connection conn = null;
  		public DatabaseConnection() {
  		}
  		public void openDatabaseConnection() {
  				try {
  						InitialContext ctx = new InitialContext();
  						DataSource datasource = (DataSource) ctx.lookup(DB_DATASRC_REF);
  						conn = datasource.getConnection();
  				} catch (NamingException ex) {...}
  				} catch (SQLException ex) {...}
  		}
  		// Member functions for retrieving database connection and accessing database
  		...
  }
What changed: the unsafe sink is replaced (or the input is validated/escaped) so the same payload no longer triggers the weakness.
Liste de contrôle de prévention

How to prevent CWE-245

  • Architecture Use safe-by-default frameworks and APIs that prevent the unsafe pattern from being expressible.
  • Implementation Validate input at trust boundaries; use allowlists, not denylists.
  • Implementation Apply the principle of least privilege to credentials, file paths, and runtime permissions.
  • Testing Cover this weakness in CI: SAST rules + targeted unit tests for the data flow.
  • Operation Monitor logs for the runtime signals listed in the next section.
Signaux de détection

How to detect CWE-245

Automated Static Analysis High

Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.)

CWE-245

Don't catalog this weakness. Prove it's reachable.

Plexicus turns CWE catalogs into evidence: every CWE-pattern is matched against your real code graph, reach is proven on a sandbox clone, and verified findings ship as reviewed PRs.

Questions fréquentes

Frequently asked questions

Qu'est-ce que CWE-245 ?

This vulnerability occurs when a J2EE application handles database connections directly instead of using the container's built-in connection management system.

Quelle est la gravité de CWE-245 ?

MITRE n'a pas publié de note de probabilité d'exploitation pour cette faiblesse. Traitez-la comme un impact moyen jusqu'à ce que votre modèle de menace prouve le contraire.

Quels langages ou plateformes sont affectés par CWE-245 ?

MITRE lists the following affected platforms: Java.

Comment puis-je prévenir CWE-245 ?

Use safe-by-default frameworks, validate untrusted input at trust boundaries, and apply the principle of least privilege. Cover the data-flow signature in CI with SAST.

Comment Plexicus détecte et corrige CWE-245 ?

Le moteur SAST de Plexicus reconnaît la signature de flux de données de CWE-245 à chaque commit. Lorsqu'une correspondance est trouvée, notre agent Codex Remedium ouvre une PR de correction avec le code corrigé, les tests et un résumé d'une ligne pour le relecteur.

Où puis-je en savoir plus sur CWE-245 ?

MITRE publie la définition canonique à https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/245.html. Vous pouvez également consulter la documentation OWASP et NIST pour des conseils adjacents.

Prêt à valider l'essentiel ?

Prêt à valider ce qui compte.

Plexicus est Proof-Driven AppSec : findings validés, compréhension contextuelle et remédiation relue — ancrée dans la preuve, scopée avec vous.

Qualification

Vérifiez si l'AI Swarm Pentest convient à votre environnement.

Partagez le contexte minimum. Nous vérifierons le périmètre et indiquerons la prochaine étape commerciale.

Avant d'envoyer — vérifiez que vous correspondez

0 / 280

Sans engagement. Si vous ne correspondez pas, nous vous le dirons.

SAMPLE HANDOVER · ILLUSTRATIVE

Sample evidence handover

A trimmed view of what your team receives at the end of an AI Swarm Pentest engagement. Real engagements include full technical evidence, executive narrative, and a remediation plan.

VALIDATED FINDING Evidence attached

Server-Side Request Forgery in webhooks/receiver

demo-project/sample-app · src/webhooks/receiver.py:42

SeverityHigh CVSS 3.18.6 Priority79 Confirmedvia replay

Untrusted caller-supplied URLs reach an internal egress without an allowlist. Replayed in a sandbox against a fresh authorized target — the same control was validated to fail twice.

REVIEWER-READY REMEDIATION Merge-ready PR

Validate the target URL against an allowlist of permitted hostnames. Reject private/internal IP ranges. Enforce HTTPS only.

plexicus/remediation/webhooks-ssrf 3 changed · 0 new files
42resp = requests.get(target_url)
42+if not is_allowed_host(target_url):
43+  raise WebhookRejected(target_url)
44+resp = requests.get(target_url, timeout=5)
Every engagement hands over:
  • Executive briefing
  • Validated findings list
  • Merge-ready PRs
  • Compliance mapping (NIS2 · DORA · CRA)
Tour privé Pour les investisseurs