CVE-2026-12044: pgAdmin 4: SQL injection in COMMENT ON ... IS '<description>' rendering across dialog templates
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 34/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.70% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 53.9% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: pgadmin4 (openSUSE:Tumbleweed) 9.17-1.1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to pgadmin4 (openSUSE:Tumbleweed) 9.17-1.1 or later.
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
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
SQL injection in pgAdmin 4 across every dialog template that renders ``COMMENT ON ... IS '<description>'`` for a user-supplied description field. The Jinja templates for Domains (and their constraints), Foreign Tables, Languages, and Event Triggers, plus the Views OID-lookup query, interpolated the description directly inside a single-quoted SQL literal -- ``'{{ data.description }}'`` -- instead of passing it through the ``qtLiteral`` escape filter. An authenticated pgAdmin user with permission to create or alter the affected object types could submit a description containing an apostrophe, break out of the literal and chain arbitrary SQL. The injected SQL runs under the PostgreSQL role the user is already authenticated as; for a connected role with ``COPY ... TO/FROM PROGRAM`` (typically PostgreSQL superuser), this chains to OS command execution on the PostgreSQL host. The defect does not cross a privilege boundary -- the user already has direct SQL access to that role through pgAdmin's Query Tool -- so the attacker gains no capability beyond what their database role already grants. The marginal impact captures bypass of any application-layer Query Tool gating an operator may have configured. The defect was originally reported against the Domain Dialog ``description`` field; a code-wide audit identified sixteen sites of the same pattern across the templates listed above. The same review also surfaced ten related sinks in the pgstattuple/pgstatindex stats templates -- ``pgstattuple('{{schema}}.{{table}}')`` and the matching pgstatindex shape -- where ``qtIdent`` escapes embedded double quotes inside the identifier but not apostrophes, so a user with CREATE privilege on a schema could plant a table or index named ``foo'bar`` and a later stats viewer would render an unbalanced literal. Fix is layered: 1. Sites: replace every ``'{{ x.description }}'`` with ``{{ x.description|qtLiteral(conn) }}`` (no surrounding quotes -- the filter wraps the value in escaped quotes itself). Plumb ``conn=self.conn`` through every ``render_template`` call that loads one of these templates. Also corrects a ``{ % elif`` Jinja typo in the foreign-table schema diff (dead branch). Rewrite the ten pgstattuple/pgstatindex stats sites to address the relation via OID + ``::oid::regclass`` cast (e.g. ``pgstattuple({{ tid }}::oid::regclass)``), eliminating the embedded literal-call form entirely so that bug-class can no longer recur there. 2. Driver hardening: ``qtLiteral`` (in ``utils/driver/psycopg3/__init__.py``) used to silently return the raw unescaped value when its ``conn`` argument was falsy. It now raises ``ValueError`` -- surfacing the entire bug class going forward. The change immediately uncovered eight latent plumbing bugs (in ``schemas/__init__.py``, ``schemas/functions/__init__.py``, ``schemas/tables/utils.py``, ``foreign_servers/__init__.py``, and seven sites in ``roles/__init__.py``) -- all fixed as part of this patch. The inner ``except`` block that swallowed adapter-level failures and returned the raw value is also removed, so unadaptable inputs raise instead of leaking unescaped values. 3. Regression tests: a per-template behavioural test renders each previously-vulnerable template with an apostrophe-injection payload and asserts the escaped fragment is present and the vulnerable fragment absent; a lint test walks every ``*.sql`` template flagging any ``'{{ ... }}'`` single-quote-wrapped interpolation against an explicit allowlist; unit tests cover the new qtLiteral fail-fast and inner-except raise paths. This issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 1.0 before 9.16.
- Published
- Jun 19, 2026
- Updated
- Oct 26, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.7% · 53th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-89
Report tools
Action score
34
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 34 / 40 · 8.7 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.7%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · PostgreSQL
- 8.8
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi 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 |
|---|---|---|
| pgadmin | pgadmin 4 | cpe:2.3:a:pgadmin:pgadmin_4 |
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (PostgreSQL). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
pgadmin.org pgAdmin 4
- 1.0 and later · before 9.16affected
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- pgadmin pgadmin 41.0 and later · before 9.16
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | pgadmin4 | before 9.17-1.1 | 9.17-1.1 |
Same product
pgadmin: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2024-2044Unsafe Deserialisation and Remote Code Execution by an Authenticated user in pgAdmin 463This week
- CVE-2024-3116Remote Code Execution Vulnerability through the validate binary path API in pgAdmin 460This week
- CVE-2022-4223The pgAdmin server includes an HTTP API that is intended to be used to validate the path a user selects to external PostgreSQL utilities…59Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-7819May 11, 2026 · pgAdmin 4: Symbolic-link path traversal in File Manager allows arbitrary file write28Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-7820May 11, 2026 · pgAdmin 4: Account-lockout bypass via Flask-Security default /login view27Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-12045Jun 19, 2026 · pgAdmin 4: AI Assistant read-only transaction bypass allows unauthorised writes and remote code execution37Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| opensuse:pgadmin4 | 9.17-1.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
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.
No dated events beyond publication.
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Ashesh Vashi <ashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com>remediation developer
- Jasser Chebbi <jasserchebbi@outlook.com>finder
- Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>remediation developer
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2026-1735142 days apartpgAdmin 4: AI Assistant read-only transaction bypass via sqlparse/PostgreSQL lexer disagreement (incomplete fix for CVE-2026-12045)37Monitor
- CVE-2026-781539 days apartpgAdmin 4: SQL injection in Maintenance tool option values leading to remote code execution34Monitor
- CVE-2026-1734642 days apartpgAdmin 4: SQL injection via unescaped object names in index Statistics and publication/subscription dependency views (incomplete fix for CVE-2026-12044)34Monitor
- CVE-2026-120500 days apartpgAdmin 4: SQL injection in named restore point endpoint21Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
- CVE-2026-120460 days apartpgAdmin 4: Unauthenticated pickle deserialization in SQL Editor close / update_connection routes enables remote code execution38Monitor
Not on record for this CVE: EPSS history · public bounty program.
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-89 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')CVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
nvd-secondary
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 (1)
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.