Skip to main content
← All vulnerabilities
CVE-2026-116245

pgAdmin 4: Connection services are not restricted in server mode

pgAdmin 4 versions before 9.19 are affected in server mode. The fix is in pgAdmin 4 9.19.

Published
Last modified
published
Not listed in CISA KEV
Specific setups only
Fix
Fixed in 9.19
None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub

Summary

pgAdmin 4, the web-based administration tool for PostgreSQL, is affected when running in server mode. Any user of the deployed instance could abuse connection service entries or environment settings on the host to connect using credentials they should not have access to.

Summarized by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5. Verify details against the original sources.

Read the original description

libpq looks a connection service up in the service file of the operating-system account running pgAdmin 4, and an entry there can hold a password or name a password file or client certificate. In server mode any user could set a server's Service, or a "service" connection parameter, to one of those entries and connect with its credentials. A PGPASSWORD or PGSERVICE variable set for that account was likewise used by libpq for every connection without a value of its own and passed on to the utilities, and pg_dumpall read a maintenance database name such as "service=..." as a connection string. The fix adds the SERVER_MODE_ALLOWED_SERVICES setting, empty by default: in server mode only a listed service can be used, the servicefile parameter is refused, and PGPASSWORD and PGSERVICE are removed from pgAdmin's environment at startup. The allowlist is checked again on the final connection string, and the pg_dumpall database name is wrapped as a connection string. This issue affects pgAdmin 4: before 9.19.

Timeline

  1. CVE published
  2. First seen by cve.now

Affected versions

  • pgadmin.org pgAdmin 4

    fixed in 9.19

References 2

GitHub · pgadmin-org/pgadmin4

FAQ

Questions about CVE-2026-116245

What should I do about it?

Upgrade to pgAdmin 4 9.19 or later, the version that contains the fix. No workaround is listed for this issue.Source: github.com

Is it being exploited?

It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data