vciy

CVE-2026-12044

INDEX BUILT · 2026-09-20

No source can show you its own past. This one can.

Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.

pgAdmin 4: SQL injection in COMMENT ON ... IS '<description>' rendering across dialog templates

CVE-2026-120444 of 4 sources documented this
24

rank 24 = 0 + 22 + 0 + 2 + 0

rank@v1 · backlog

Someone is already using it

CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS

EPSS 0.00709  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

What it costs you if it fires

NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own

CVSS 8.8, from the CNA  ·  without this subject the record ranks 2

It is getting worse, not staying still

FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed

no persisting rise in 365 days  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

How much of the world it touches

NVD CPE configurations

1 product in the CPE ranges  ·  without this subject the record ranks 22

Someone else already set the date

CISA KEV remediation due date

no CISA due date  ·  without this subject the record ranks 24

Unaudited dollar value2 of 3 inputs carry a receipt
Exposure$35,400over the next 30 days, if this record is yours
Movementno material movementthe record holds only daily drift and scoring model releases
Basisassumeda published average, not your estate

$35,400 = $4.99M incident cost x 1 exposure x 0.00709 likelihood

udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run

$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.

Hindsight · the state

0.00709EPSSNOT IN KEVas of 2026-09-20
Severity8.8 HIGHreceipt
Harmtotal lossreceipt
Exploitationnone in held sources
Defensefix version namedreceipt
Movementrisenreceipt
PLATEAU10Minimal movement since 2026-06-23, 31 days at 0.01, as of 2026-07-24. arc-rules@v1

Foresight · where to check next

CVE-2023-34362CVE-2021-42258CVE-2020-29574CVE-2017-18362FortinetProgress Software12044

This record is one instance of CWE-89, improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection'). The index holds 20889 prior instances of this class, 31 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. taxonomy@v1

Full pattern panel

Prior records in this weakness class. Each is its own record, dated and receipted.
Color is a claim, not decoration:the hostile worldthe defenseno signalspoke length is how much of the record matches, not how bad it is

Running pgadmin.org pgAdmin 4? Check your version

A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.

Watch this record

Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.

What counts as a move

Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)

Record your call

Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.

AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigated

Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.

Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.

Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness

Written for the ticket you're about to file.

Reachnetwork-reachable · low privileges required · no user interaction · low attack complexityreceipt
ImpactComplete confidentiality, integrity and availability lossreceipt
Scored fromCVSS v3.1 · the CNA's vectorreceipt
Weakness classCWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection'); CWE-116 Improper Encoding or Escaping of Outputreceipt
Published consequencesCWE-89: Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Confidentiality: Read Application Data; Authentication: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity, Bypass Protection…[email protected]

CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA

The fix, and how long it's been waiting.

Fixed in9.16receipt
Patch available sinceNo dated patch-availability record in held sources. The index holds reference URLs without dates and only the current revision of the CVE record, so the day a fix first existed cannot be derived. Only the versions it landed in.

Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score

Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.

  • RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
  • RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
  • RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
  • RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known

Authority who says so

CVSS, the CNA8.8 HIGHreceipt
Exploit probability0.00709 · top 48% of all CVEsreceipt
Blast breadth1 product across 1 vendorderived
Assigned byPostgreSQLreceipt
Recorded changes3 · last 19 Sep 2026derived

Affected & Fixed Versions as published

Affected productpgadmin.org pgAdmin 4receipt
Published rangespgadmin 4 >= 1.0 < 9.16receipt
Fixed in9.16receipt

A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.

Did this affect your environment?Answering needs an account.

Attack path

Network requestrequires low privilegespgadmin.org pgAdmin 4CWE-89 SQL injectionFull compromise (C/I/A)C:H / I:H / A:Hexploits CWE-89data compromise

What it is stated by the CNA

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. receipt

Read the rest of the CNA's description

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.

NVD's analysis a second authority

weakness
CWE-89; CWE-116
affected versions
pgadmin 4 >= 1.0 < 9.16
also scored by
8.7 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 · 8.8…

check it yourself github.com github.com github.com receipt

Movement the material steps

23 Jun 20260.00513
24 Jul 20260.00709
Show all 3 observations
23 Jun 20260.00513
2 Jul 20260.00489
24 Jul 20260.00709

3 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt

The full biography

EPSS 0.00709Published2026-06-18Index as of2026-07-24

The record had been public for 1 month when this index was last written.

Published 2026-06-18 receipt · Index as of 2026-07-24 derived

The pattern, elsewhere

This record is one instance of CWE-89, improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection'). The index holds 20889 prior instances of this class, 31 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. [email protected]

CVE-2023-34362matches 7 of 9KEV listed · 2023receipt
CVE-2021-42258matches 7 of 9KEV listed · 2021receipt
CVE-2020-29574matches 7 of 9KEV listed · 2020receipt
CVE-2017-18362matches 7 of 9KEV listed · 2019receipt
CVE-2023-48788 · Fortinet FortiClientEMSmatches 7 of 10KEV listed · 2024receipt
CVE-2024-6670 · Progress Software Corporation WhatsUp Goldmatches 7 of 10KEV listed · 2024receipt

"Matches n of m" counts the attributes the two records can both be compared on: the CVSS metrics they share a version of, any weakness class beyond this one, and the vendor. fit-rules@v1

20889 records in this class held. The six above are drawn from the ones CISA has listed as exploited, ranked by how much of the record matches this one. That is why every one of them is KEV-listed: the pool is, so the colour on those spokes says nothing the pool has not already said.

No curated product neighbourhood is held for this product, so the records above are the nearest this index can name. The neighbourhood table covers a small set of products and is extended by hand.

Siblings and hubs

Records related to this one

Its defect family

pgadmin.org pgadmin 4

Of the 6 records in this family that state one, this holds the highest EPSS percentile: 0.51097.

Grouped by shared product and weakness, not by shared vulnerability. Each record's own state is on its own page.

Family membership: held values

This record is one of a group, and the group's page describes all of them. This page is kept and dated, and the defect family's own page is the one we offer for indexing: the whole group.

Browse the index from here

These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2026-12044.

What usually comes next

Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.

Everything on this page is free. Public data. Withholding it protects nothing.