Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-17566

RCE in Pgadmin 4 ≤ 9.18

Published
31 July 2026
Modified
05 August 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 9.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/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
EPSS Score 0.0041 34th percentile
Risk Priority 40 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-17566 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Pgadmin Pgadmin 4. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 34th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

pgAdmin 4's Import/Export Data tool builds a psql \copy (...) command line by interpolating a user-supplied SQL query into a Jinja template and passing the rendered line to psql via --command. To stop an attacker from breaking out of the…

more

(...) wrapper, create_import_export_job() (route POST /import_export/job/<sid>, gated only by the ordinary, commonly-granted tools_import_export_data permission) validated the query with a hand-written parenthesis-balance checker, _is_query_parens_balanced(). That checker always treated a backslash before a single quote (\') as escaping the quote, i.e. as if standard_conforming_strings were off. PostgreSQL has defaulted standard_conforming_strings to on since 9.1 (2010), the default on every PostgreSQL version pgAdmin 4 currently supports (13-18); under that default psql's own \copy tokenizer treats \ as an ordinary character, so a single quote immediately after it closes the string literal. A query such as SELECT 'a\') TO PROGRAM 'echo pwned' x' was therefore accepted as "balanced" by pgAdmin's checker (which believed the ) was still inside the string), while psql, run through the actual rendered command line, closes the string at that point and treats the following ) as the end of the wrapping \copy (...) subquery, exposing an attacker-chosen TO PROGRAM '<command>' clause that psql executes via popen() -- independent of a subsequent syntax error later on the same line. This is the same class of bug as CVE-2025-12762/CVE-2025-13780 (RCE via psql meta-command/COPY injection during PLAIN-format dump restore), reached through an independently written defense in a different module (Import/Export Data rather than Restore) that had its own, different logic bug (inverted backslash-escape semantics rather than a BOM-defeated regex anchor). The fix rejects any backslash inside a single-quoted string in the query outright, rather than picking one of the two possible psql interpretations. This is intentionally conservative: because the correct interpretation of \ depends on the target server's standard_conforming_strings setting, which the checker cannot reliably know at validation time, refusing the query is safer than guessing. This issue affects pgAdmin 4: from the introduction of _is_query_parens_balanced() before 9.18.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1036 Masquerading Stealth
Adversaries may attempt to manipulate features of their artifacts to make them appear legitimate or benign to users and/or security tools.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-7816Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2026-17347Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2026-17351Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2026-12044Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2025-12762Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2025-13780Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2025-2945Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2026-12047Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2026-12048Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4
CVE-2025-2946Same product: Pgadmin Pgadmin 4

Affected Assets

pgadmin
pgadmin 4
≤ 9.18

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.2.5
  • V1.2.8
  • V15.2.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.

Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.

Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.

Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.

Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and canonicalization that directly prevent misinterpretation of inputs.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for robust input handling and sanitization to avoid misinterpretation.

prevents

Secure architecture principles include defensive input processing and error handling that reduce misinterpretation risks.

prevents

Secure coding standards require strict input validation and canonical forms to eliminate misinterpretation vulnerabilities.

References