CVE-2026-12045 (GCVE-0-2026-12045)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-18 23:37 – Updated: 2026-06-23 03:55
VLAI
EPSS
VEX
Title
pgAdmin 4: AI Assistant read-only transaction bypass allows unauthorised writes and remote code execution
Summary
Read-only transaction bypass in the pgAdmin 4 AI Assistant allows an attacker who can influence database content that the assistant reads to execute arbitrary SQL with the privileges of the pgAdmin user's database role.
The AI Assistant's execute_sql_query tool runs LLM-generated SQL inside a BEGIN TRANSACTION READ ONLY wrapper to prevent data modification. The LLM-supplied query was forwarded to the database driver without restriction to a single statement or to read-only verbs, so a multi-statement payload beginning with COMMIT, END, ROLLBACK, or ABORT terminated the read-only transaction and ran subsequent statements in autocommit mode. The trailing ROLLBACK then had no effect.
Delivery is via prompt injection: an attacker who can write content into any object the AI Assistant may inspect (a row, a column value, a comment) can cause the LLM to emit the multi-statement payload as a tool call. With ordinary write privileges on the pgAdmin user's role the attacker can perform unauthorised data modification. When the pgAdmin user's role is a PostgreSQL superuser or holds pg_execute_server_program, the chain extends to remote code execution on the database server host via COPY ... TO PROGRAM.
Fix validates the LLM-supplied query up front: it must parse to exactly one non-empty / non-comment statement whose leading real token (after stripping whitespace, comments, and punctuation) is one of SELECT, WITH, EXPLAIN, SHOW, VALUES, or TABLE. Transaction-control verbs, DML, DDL, CALL, COPY, DO, SET/RESET, and everything else are rejected before any database work happens. PostgreSQL's READ ONLY mode continues to backstop data-modifying CTEs, EXPLAIN ANALYZE on writes, and volatile side effects.
This issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 9.13 before 9.16.
Severity
9 (Critical)
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-06-22 00:00 UTC
CWE
Assigner
References
2 references
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10022 | issue-tracking |
| https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/bf… | patch |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | CPE status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pgadmin.org | pgAdmin 4 |
Affected:
9.13 , < 9.16
(custom)
|
guessed |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-12045",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-22T00:00:00+00:00",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-23T03:55:43.509Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"AI Assistant",
"LLM Tools"
],
"product": "pgAdmin 4",
"programFiles": [
"https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/llm/tools/database.py"
],
"repo": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4",
"vendor": "pgadmin.org",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "9.16",
"status": "affected",
"version": "9.13",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Isaac Chen \u003cisaac9503@gmail.com\u003e"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Dave Page \u003cpage@pgadmin.org\u003e"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation reviewer",
"value": "Kundan Sable \u003ckundan.sable@enterprisedb.com\u003e"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Read-only transaction bypass in the pgAdmin 4 AI Assistant allows an attacker who can influence database content that the assistant reads to execute arbitrary SQL with the privileges of the pgAdmin user\u0027s database role.\n\nThe AI Assistant\u0027s execute_sql_query tool runs LLM-generated SQL inside a BEGIN TRANSACTION READ ONLY wrapper to prevent data modification. The LLM-supplied query was forwarded to the database driver without restriction to a single statement or to read-only verbs, so a multi-statement payload beginning with COMMIT, END, ROLLBACK, or ABORT terminated the read-only transaction and ran subsequent statements in autocommit mode. The trailing ROLLBACK then had no effect.\n\nDelivery is via prompt injection: an attacker who can write content into any object the AI Assistant may inspect (a row, a column value, a comment) can cause the LLM to emit the multi-statement payload as a tool call. With ordinary write privileges on the pgAdmin user\u0027s role the attacker can perform unauthorised data modification. When the pgAdmin user\u0027s role is a PostgreSQL superuser or holds pg_execute_server_program, the chain extends to remote code execution on the database server host via COPY ... TO PROGRAM.\n\nFix validates the LLM-supplied query up front: it must parse to exactly one non-empty / non-comment statement whose leading real token (after stripping whitespace, comments, and punctuation) is one of SELECT, WITH, EXPLAIN, SHOW, VALUES, or TABLE. Transaction-control verbs, DML, DDL, CALL, COPY, DO, SET/RESET, and everything else are rejected before any database work happens. PostgreSQL\u0027s READ ONLY mode continues to backstop data-modifying CTEs, EXPLAIN ANALYZE on writes, and volatile side effects.\n\nThis issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 9.13 before 9.16."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Threat model: indirect prompt injection. An attacker with low-privilege DB write access plants a payload in any object the AI Assistant might read (table row, column value, comment). When a pgAdmin user with a higher-privilege role (typically PostgreSQL superuser or holder of pg_execute_server_program) opens the AI Assistant against that content, the LLM emits the multi-statement payload as a tool call. The crafted payload uses COMMIT / END / ROLLBACK / ABORT to close the wrapping read-only transaction, then COPY ... TO PROGRAM to gain OS code execution on the DB host.\n\nS:C is earned by the confused-deputy pattern: the attacker is not the LLM user; third-party DB content steers the user\u0027s LLM session to execute writes the user did not authorise. This does *not* score the user self-jailbreaking their own assistant -- only the indirect-injection vector.\n\nAlternative: AC:H (-\u003e 8.0 HIGH) is defensible given LLM non-determinism (the payload doesn\u0027t fire every invocation) and the superuser-victim precondition. The 9.0 figure is the optimistic end of the range."
}
]
},
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"baseScore": 9.4,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"version": "4.0"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Same reasoning as the CVSS 3.1 entry: indirect prompt injection, third-party content drives the user\u0027s LLM session, COPY ... TO PROGRAM reaches the DB host. VC:H/VI:H/VA:H + SC:H/SI:H/SA:H since RCE on the DB host compromises both pgAdmin\u0027s authority and the downstream system. UI:P captures that the user merely uses the AI Assistant normally; the attacker does not direct any specific user action."
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
},
{
"cweId": "CWE-77",
"description": "CWE-77 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command (\u0027Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T23:37:35.182Z",
"orgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"shortName": "PostgreSQL"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"issue-tracking"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10022"
},
{
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/bf4792444446f0e7ab721d23cbd6bfe6afaa7a8b"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "EXTERNAL"
},
"title": "pgAdmin 4: AI Assistant read-only transaction bypass allows unauthorised writes and remote code execution"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"assignerShortName": "PostgreSQL",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-12045",
"datePublished": "2026-06-18T23:37:35.182Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-11T20:40:06.461Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-23T03:55:43.509Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"epss": {
"cve": "CVE-2026-12045",
"date": "2026-09-19",
"epss": "0.00658",
"percentile": "0.50055"
},
"nvd": {
"cve": {
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"AI Assistant",
"LLM Tools"
],
"product": "pgAdmin 4",
"programFiles": [
"https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/llm/tools/database.py"
],
"repo": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4",
"vendor": "pgadmin.org",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "9.16",
"status": "affected",
"version": "9.13",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007"
}
],
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:pgadmin:pgadmin_4:*:*:*:*:*:postgresql:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "DF458F90-77B9-4602-8B5B-76408903E9FD",
"versionEndExcluding": "9.16",
"versionStartIncluding": "9.13",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Read-only transaction bypass in the pgAdmin 4 AI Assistant allows an attacker who can influence database content that the assistant reads to execute arbitrary SQL with the privileges of the pgAdmin user\u0027s database role.\n\nThe AI Assistant\u0027s execute_sql_query tool runs LLM-generated SQL inside a BEGIN TRANSACTION READ ONLY wrapper to prevent data modification. The LLM-supplied query was forwarded to the database driver without restriction to a single statement or to read-only verbs, so a multi-statement payload beginning with COMMIT, END, ROLLBACK, or ABORT terminated the read-only transaction and ran subsequent statements in autocommit mode. The trailing ROLLBACK then had no effect.\n\nDelivery is via prompt injection: an attacker who can write content into any object the AI Assistant may inspect (a row, a column value, a comment) can cause the LLM to emit the multi-statement payload as a tool call. With ordinary write privileges on the pgAdmin user\u0027s role the attacker can perform unauthorised data modification. When the pgAdmin user\u0027s role is a PostgreSQL superuser or holds pg_execute_server_program, the chain extends to remote code execution on the database server host via COPY ... TO PROGRAM.\n\nFix validates the LLM-supplied query up front: it must parse to exactly one non-empty / non-comment statement whose leading real token (after stripping whitespace, comments, and punctuation) is one of SELECT, WITH, EXPLAIN, SHOW, VALUES, or TABLE. Transaction-control verbs, DML, DDL, CALL, COPY, DO, SET/RESET, and everything else are rejected before any database work happens. PostgreSQL\u0027s READ ONLY mode continues to backstop data-modifying CTEs, EXPLAIN ANALYZE on writes, and volatile side effects.\n\nThis issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 9.13 before 9.16."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-12045",
"lastModified": "2026-07-01T19:26:30.593",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.0,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 2.3,
"impactScore": 6.0,
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"type": "Secondary"
},
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
"impactScore": 5.9,
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
],
"cvssMetricV40": [
{
"cvssData": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"baseScore": 9.4,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"type": "Secondary"
}
],
"ssvcV203": [
{
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"ssvcData": {
"id": "CVE-2026-12045",
"options": [
{
"exploitation": "none"
},
{
"automatable": "no"
},
{
"technicalImpact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-22T00:00:00+00:00",
"version": "2.0.3"
}
}
]
},
"published": "2026-06-19T00:16:46.703",
"references": [
{
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/bf4792444446f0e7ab721d23cbd6bfe6afaa7a8b"
},
{
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"tags": [
"Issue Tracking",
"Patch",
"Third Party Advisory"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10022"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-77"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-89"
}
],
"source": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
},
"redhat_vex": {
"current_release_date": "2026-06-28T11:22:25+00:00",
"cve": "CVE-2026-12045",
"id": "CVE-2026-12045",
"initial_release_date": "2026-06-18T23:37:35.182000+00:00",
"product_status:known_not_affected": "1",
"source": "Red Hat CSAF VEX",
"status": "final",
"title": "pgadmin4: pgAdmin 4: Remote code execution via prompt injection in AI Assistant",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-12045.json",
"version": "3"
},
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-12045",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-22T19:12:05.335738Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-22T19:12:19.078Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"AI Assistant",
"LLM Tools"
],
"product": "pgAdmin 4",
"programFiles": [
"https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/llm/tools/database.py"
],
"repo": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4",
"vendor": "pgadmin.org",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "9.16",
"status": "affected",
"version": "9.13",
"versionType": "custom"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Isaac Chen \u003cisaac9503@gmail.com\u003e"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation developer",
"value": "Dave Page \u003cpage@pgadmin.org\u003e"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "remediation reviewer",
"value": "Kundan Sable \u003ckundan.sable@enterprisedb.com\u003e"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Read-only transaction bypass in the pgAdmin 4 AI Assistant allows an attacker who can influence database content that the assistant reads to execute arbitrary SQL with the privileges of the pgAdmin user\u0027s database role.\n\nThe AI Assistant\u0027s execute_sql_query tool runs LLM-generated SQL inside a BEGIN TRANSACTION READ ONLY wrapper to prevent data modification. The LLM-supplied query was forwarded to the database driver without restriction to a single statement or to read-only verbs, so a multi-statement payload beginning with COMMIT, END, ROLLBACK, or ABORT terminated the read-only transaction and ran subsequent statements in autocommit mode. The trailing ROLLBACK then had no effect.\n\nDelivery is via prompt injection: an attacker who can write content into any object the AI Assistant may inspect (a row, a column value, a comment) can cause the LLM to emit the multi-statement payload as a tool call. With ordinary write privileges on the pgAdmin user\u0027s role the attacker can perform unauthorised data modification. When the pgAdmin user\u0027s role is a PostgreSQL superuser or holds pg_execute_server_program, the chain extends to remote code execution on the database server host via COPY ... TO PROGRAM.\n\nFix validates the LLM-supplied query up front: it must parse to exactly one non-empty / non-comment statement whose leading real token (after stripping whitespace, comments, and punctuation) is one of SELECT, WITH, EXPLAIN, SHOW, VALUES, or TABLE. Transaction-control verbs, DML, DDL, CALL, COPY, DO, SET/RESET, and everything else are rejected before any database work happens. PostgreSQL\u0027s READ ONLY mode continues to backstop data-modifying CTEs, EXPLAIN ANALYZE on writes, and volatile side effects.\n\nThis issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 9.13 before 9.16."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV3_1": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Threat model: indirect prompt injection. An attacker with low-privilege DB write access plants a payload in any object the AI Assistant might read (table row, column value, comment). When a pgAdmin user with a higher-privilege role (typically PostgreSQL superuser or holder of pg_execute_server_program) opens the AI Assistant against that content, the LLM emits the multi-statement payload as a tool call. The crafted payload uses COMMIT / END / ROLLBACK / ABORT to close the wrapping read-only transaction, then COPY ... TO PROGRAM to gain OS code execution on the DB host.\n\nS:C is earned by the confused-deputy pattern: the attacker is not the LLM user; third-party DB content steers the user\u0027s LLM session to execute writes the user did not authorise. This does *not* score the user self-jailbreaking their own assistant -- only the indirect-injection vector.\n\nAlternative: AC:H (-\u003e 8.0 HIGH) is defensible given LLM non-determinism (the payload doesn\u0027t fire every invocation) and the superuser-victim precondition. The 9.0 figure is the optimistic end of the range."
}
]
},
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"baseScore": 9.4,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
"version": "4.0"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Same reasoning as the CVSS 3.1 entry: indirect prompt injection, third-party content drives the user\u0027s LLM session, COPY ... TO PROGRAM reaches the DB host. VC:H/VI:H/VA:H + SC:H/SI:H/SA:H since RCE on the DB host compromises both pgAdmin\u0027s authority and the downstream system. UI:P captures that the user merely uses the AI Assistant normally; the attacker does not direct any specific user action."
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-89",
"description": "CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (\u0027SQL Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
},
{
"cweId": "CWE-77",
"description": "CWE-77 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command (\u0027Command Injection\u0027)",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T23:37:35.182Z",
"orgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"shortName": "PostgreSQL"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"issue-tracking"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10022"
},
{
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/bf4792444446f0e7ab721d23cbd6bfe6afaa7a8b"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "EXTERNAL"
},
"title": "pgAdmin 4: AI Assistant read-only transaction bypass allows unauthorised writes and remote code execution"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
"assignerShortName": "PostgreSQL",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-12045",
"datePublished": "2026-06-18T23:37:35.182Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-11T20:40:06.461Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-23T03:55:43.509Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Loading…
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.
Loading…