A SQL injection vulnerability in an Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 search configuration script could allow an attacker to execute
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 28/100)
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (Exploit-DB); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 3.2% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 88.1% of all records.
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. Administrator privileges are required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
- Mentioned 1 time in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
A SQL injection vulnerability in an Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 search configuration script could allow an attacker to execute SQL commands to upload and execute arbitrary code that may harm the target system.
- Published
- Mar 15, 2018
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 3.3% · 88th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-89
Report tools
Action score
28
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 27 / 40 · 6.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 3.3%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| trendmicro | email encryption gateway | cpe:2.3:a:trendmicro:email_encryption_gateway |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- trendmicro email encryption gateway5.5
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (trendmicro). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Trend Micro Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway
- 5.5affected
Same product
trendmicro: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2018-6229A SQL injection vulnerability in an Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 edit policy script could allow an attacker to execute SQL comma42Plan
- CVE-2018-6228A SQL injection vulnerability in a Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 policy script could allow an attacker to execute SQL commands to42Plan
- CVE-2018-6223A missing authentication for appliance registration vulnerability in Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 could allow an attacker to man42Plan
- CVE-2018-6220An arbitrary file write vulnerability in Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 could allow an attacker to inject arbitrary data, which ma42Plan
- CVE-2016-4351SQL injection vulnerability in the authentication functionality in Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway (TMEEG) 5.5 before build 1107 allows40Plan
- CVE-2018-10354A command injection remote command execution vulnerability in Trend Micro Email Encryption Gateway 5.5 could allow a remote attacker to exec39Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×1
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | webapps | 2018-02-22 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- First PoC-22 d
- Published
- TodayOct 14, 2026+3134 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
National notice (Türkiye Cybersecurity Directorate / USOM)
Official security notices citing this record; remediation advice is on the agency's page.
- TR-21-0136 · Feb 15, 2021(Trend Micro Zafiyeti)
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-89 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
The query text is built by concatenating user input. The database cannot tell where the data ends and the command begins.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-89 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const owner = req.query.owner;const rows = await db.query( "SELECT * FROM files WHERE owner = '" + owner + "'");Fixed
const owner = req.query.owner;const rows = await db.query( "SELECT * FROM files WHERE owner = $1", [owner]);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Expanding Control over the Operating System from the DatabaseCAPEC-470Very High
- SQL InjectionCAPEC-66likelihood: High · High
- Blind SQL InjectionCAPEC-7likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.