Vulnerability Database

374,644

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-17346 — pgadmin / pgadmin_4

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')

The fix for CVE-2026-12044 in pgAdmin 4 9.16 hardened qtLiteral and switched sixteen COMMENT ON / pgstattuple / pgstatindex templates to it, but missed several sinks that had been placed in test_sql_string_literal_lint.py's ALLOWLIST on the incorrect assumption that schema, table, publication, and subscription names sourced from pg_catalog via the browser tree could never contain an apostrophe. PostgreSQL permits arbitrary characters in quoted identifiers, so a low-privileged user able to CREATE TABLE, CREATE PUBLICATION, or CREATE SUBSCRIPTION can plant an apostrophe'd object name that breaks out of the unescaped '{{ name }}' template interpolation the moment any user (including a higher-privileged one) opens that object's Statistics or Dependencies tab, allowing arbitrary SQL statement injection in the viewing user's database session.

Affected sinks: the Index Statistics query for all-indexes listing (coll_stats.sql, both the 16_plus and default PostgreSQL-version template variants -- distinct from the single-index stats.sql path already fixed in CVE-2026-12044), and the publication and subscription dependencies.sql / get_position.sql templates (both the pg and ppas/EPAS dialect variants for publications).

Fix switches all of these templates to qtLiteral(conn) for name interpolation, and updates publications/init.py and subscriptions/init.py to pass conn=self.conn into the dependencies.sql render_template call so the qtLiteral filter has a connection to quote against. The corresponding ALLOWLIST entries in test_sql_string_literal_lint.py are removed now that these sinks are properly escaped rather than merely assumed safe. A behavioral regression test renders each fixed template with a stacked-statement apostrophe payload and asserts both that the object name appears exactly as qtLiteral-escaped and that the rendered SQL parses as exactly one statement, verifying the assertion genuinely fails against the pre-patch raw-interpolation form.

This issue affects pgAdmin 4: the Index Statistics sink from 1.0, and the Publications/Subscriptions sinks from 5.0, both before 9.17.

  • Published: Jul 31, 2026
  • Updated: Aug 1, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-17346
  • Severity: High
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 8.8
  • AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWEs:

OWASP TOP 10:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.