Shamans - Personal AI Code Security Reviews by Founders

The Evolution of an Ancient Vulnerability

SQL injection has been the #1 web vulnerability since 1998. You'd think AI would help developers avoid it. Instead, we're seeing a renaissance of SQL injection vulnerabilities, with new patterns that are harder to detect and more dangerous to exploit.

What We Found

•89% of AI-generated database code contains injection vulnerabilities
•AI creates "hybrid" injections that mix multiple attack vectors
•Traditional WAFs miss 67% of AI-generated SQL injection patterns
•Average time to exploit: 12 minutes after deployment

Classic SQL Injection vs. AI-Generated Patterns

Classic Pattern

// Obvious concatenation
$query = "SELECT * FROM users 
          WHERE id = " . $_GET['id'];

// Attack: ?id=1 OR 1=1

Easy to spot, well-documented, caught by most tools

AI Pattern

// Subtle template literal
const query = `
  SELECT * FROM users 
  WHERE id = '${userId}'
  AND status = 'active'
`;

// Attack: userId = 1' UNION SELECT...

Looks modern, passes linting, missed by scanners

New AI-Enabled Attack Vectors

1. Context-Aware Injection

AI generates different query patterns based on context, making static analysis fail:

// AI generates context-specific queries
const searchProducts = async (filters) => {
  let query = 'SELECT * FROM products WHERE 1=1';
  
  // AI adds conditions dynamically
  if (filters.category) {
    query += ` AND category = '${filters.category}'`;
  }
  if (filters.price) {
    query += ` AND price < ${filters.price}`;
  }
  if (filters.search) {
    query += ` AND name LIKE '%${filters.search}%'`;
  }
  
  return db.query(query);
};

// Attack payload:
// filters.search = "'; DROP TABLE products; --"

Why it's dangerous: Dynamic query building defeats pattern matching. Each execution path creates different vulnerabilities.

2. NoSQL Injection Hybrids

AI mixes SQL and NoSQL patterns, creating new vulnerability classes:

// MongoDB with SQL-like injection
const getUser = async (email) => {
  // AI suggests this "convenient" pattern
  return await db.users.findOne({
    $where: `this.email == '${email}'`
  });
};

// Attack: email = "' || '1'=='1"
// Dumps entire collection

// PostgreSQL JSON injection
const query = `
  SELECT * FROM users 
  WHERE data->>'email' = '${email}'
`;
// Attack: email = "' OR data->>'role' = 'admin

Why it's dangerous: Security tools designed for SQL or NoSQL miss these hybrid patterns.

3. ORM Bypass Patterns

AI suggests "optimizations" that bypass ORM security:

// Sequelize - AI suggests raw queries for "performance"
const searchUsers = async (name) => {
  // Bypasses Sequelize protections
  return await sequelize.query(
    `SELECT * FROM users WHERE name LIKE '%${name}%'`,
    { type: QueryTypes.SELECT }
  );
};

// Prisma - AI mixes safe and unsafe
const results = await prisma.$queryRaw`
  SELECT * FROM posts 
  WHERE title LIKE ${`%${search}%`}
`; // Template literal inside template literal!

Why it's dangerous: Developers trust ORMs for security, but AI suggestions often bypass built-in protections.

4. Second-Order Injection

AI creates patterns where data is safe on input but dangerous when reused:

// Step 1: AI safely stores user input
const createUser = async (username) => {
  // Properly parameterized!
  await db.query(
    'INSERT INTO users (username) VALUES (?)',
    [username]
  );
};

// Step 2: AI unsafely uses stored data
const getUserActivity = async (userId) => {
  const user = await getUser(userId);
  
  // Injection happens here!
  return await db.query(`
    SELECT * FROM activity 
    WHERE username = '${user.username}'
  `);
};

// Attack: username = "admin'; DROP TABLE activity; --"

Why it's dangerous: Passes input validation but executes when data is used later. Very hard to detect with static analysis.

5. Polyglot Injection

AI creates code vulnerable to multiple injection types simultaneously:

// Vulnerable to SQL, XSS, and command injection
const generateReport = async (reportName) => {
  // SQL injection
  const data = await db.query(`
    SELECT * FROM reports 
    WHERE name = '${reportName}'
  `);
  
  // XSS when rendered
  const html = `<h1>Report: ${reportName}</h1>`;
  
  // Command injection
  exec(`wkhtmltopdf - ${reportName}.pdf`, 
    { input: html }
  );
};

// One payload, three exploits:
// reportName = "'; DROP TABLE reports; --<script>alert(1)</script>; rm -rf /"

Why it's dangerous: Single input can trigger multiple vulnerabilities. Most scanners check for one type at a time.

Why AI Makes SQL Injection Worse

1. Training Data Pollution

AI learned from millions of vulnerable code examples. It reproduces patterns from 2010-era Stack Overflow answers and outdated tutorials.

2. Context Mixing

AI doesn't understand security boundaries. It mixes secure patterns (parameterized queries) with insecure ones (string concatenation) in the same function.

3. Plausible Wrongness

AI-generated SQL injection vulnerabilities look correct. They use modern syntax, follow naming conventions, and pass basic code review.

4. Novel Patterns

AI creates injection patterns that don't exist in security tool databases. It combines techniques in ways humans rarely do.

Real-World Case Study

The $1.2M Breach That Started With Copilot

A Series B startup's entire customer database was compromised through this Copilot-generated function:

// Copilot suggested this "clean" search function
export const searchCustomers = async (req, res) => {
  const { query, filters } = req.body;
  
  let sql = `
    SELECT c.*, COUNT(o.id) as order_count 
    FROM customers c
    LEFT JOIN orders o ON c.id = o.customer_id
    WHERE 1=1
  `;
  
  if (query) {
    sql += ` AND (
      c.name LIKE '%${query}%' OR 
      c.email LIKE '%${query}%' OR
      c.company LIKE '%${query}%'
    )`;
  }
  
  if (filters?.status) {
    sql += ` AND c.status = '${filters.status}'`;
  }
  
  sql += ' GROUP BY c.id ORDER BY c.created_at DESC';
  
  const results = await db.raw(sql);
  res.json(results);
};

The Attack:

Attacker sent: query: "' OR '1'='1' UNION SELECT * FROM payment_methods--"

The Impact:

• 47,000 customer records with PII
• 12,000 credit card tokens
• 3 months of undetected access
• $1.2M in breach costs and fines

Why It Wasn't Caught:

• Passed TypeScript checks
• Looked like modern async/await code
• Used established ORM (Knex)
• Had proper error handling

Detecting AI-Generated SQL Injection

Pattern Recognition

Look for these AI-specific patterns:

✓Template literals with SQL keywords
✓Dynamic query building with string concatenation
✓Mixed parameterized and concatenated queries
✓Raw queries in ORMs for "performance"

Enhanced Scanning Rules

// ESLint rule for AI patterns
module.exports = {
  create(context) {
    return {
      TemplateLiteral(node) {
        const code = context.getSourceCode().getText(node);
        
        // Check for SQL keywords in template literals
        if (code.match(/(SELECT|INSERT|UPDATE|DELETE|FROM|WHERE)/i)) {
          // Check if expressions are used
          if (node.expressions.length > 0) {
            context.report({
              node,
              message: 'Potential SQL injection in template literal',
              suggest: [{
                desc: 'Use parameterized queries',
                fix(fixer) {
                  // Auto-fix to parameterized query
                }
              }]
            });
          }
        }
      }
    };
  }
};

Preventing AI-Generated SQL Injection

The Defense-in-Depth Approach

1. Enforce Parameterized Queries

// Create a wrapper that enforces parameterization
class SafeDB {
  async query(sql, params = []) {
    // Reject if SQL contains template literal syntax
    const hasTemplateMarkers = sql.indexOf('$') !== -1 && sql.indexOf('{') !== -1;
    const hasConcatenation = sql.indexOf('+') !== -1;
    
    if (hasTemplateMarkers || hasConcatenation) {
      throw new Error('Use parameters, not interpolation');
    }
    return this.db.query(sql, params);
  }
}

// Usage
const db = new SafeDB(connection);
db.query('SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?', [userId]);

2. Query Builder Enforcement

// Force use of query builders
const searchUsers = async (filters) => {
  return await db('users')
    .where(builder => {
      if (filters.name) {
        builder.where('name', 'like', '%' + filters.name + '%');
      }
      if (filters.email) {
        builder.where('email', filters.email);
      }
    })
    .select('*');
};

3. Runtime Query Validation

// Middleware to validate queries
const queryValidator = (req, res, next) => {
  const originalQuery = db.query;
  
  db.query = function(sql, params) {
    // Check for dangerous patterns
    const dangerous = [
      /UNIONs+SELECT/i,
      /ORs+1s*=s*1/i,
      /';s*DROP/i,
      //*.**//  // SQL comments
    ];
    
    if (dangerous.some(pattern => pattern.test(sql))) {
      logger.alert('SQL injection attempt', { sql, ip: req.ip });
      throw new Error('Invalid query');
    }
    
    return originalQuery.call(this, sql, params);
  };
  
  next();
};

The Future of SQL Injection

As AI tools evolve, so will the vulnerabilities they create. Here's what we're watching:

Emerging Threats

• AI-generated polyglot payloads
• Context-aware injection that adapts
• Time-based blind SQL injection variants
• GraphQL/SQL hybrid attacks

Defense Evolution

• AI-specific security linters
• Runtime behavior analysis
• Query pattern learning
• Automated parameterization

Is Your AI Code Creating SQL Injection Risks?

SQL injection in AI-generated code is subtle, dangerous, and everywhere. Our founders manually review your codebase to find these patterns before attackers do.

Get SQL Injection Assessment Download Prevention Guide

SQL Injection in the Age of AI