Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-54291

Postgresql Jdbc Driver 42.7.4 – 42.7.12

Published
06 July 2026
Modified
09 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 8.2
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/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
EPSS Score 0.0020 10th percentile
Risk Priority 34 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-54291 is a high-severity Failing Open (CWE-636) vulnerability in Postgresql Postgresql Jdbc Driver. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Downgrade Attack (T1689); ranked at the 10th 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 CP-12 (Safe Mode) and SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

pgjdbc is an open source postgresql JDBC Driver. In releases 42.7.4 through 42.7.11, channelBinding=require connections can be silently downgraded from SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS with channel binding to plain SCRAM-SHA-256 without it, losing the man-in-the-middle protection the setting is meant to guarantee. An…

more

attacker who can intercept the TLS connection can trigger the downgrade with a certificate whose signature algorithm has no tls-server-end-point channel-binding hash, because the bundled com.ongres.scram:scram-client returns an empty byte array instead of failing and pgJDBC ScramAuthenticator checks only that the server advertised a PLUS mechanism, without rejecting the empty binding or checking that the negotiated mechanism uses channel binding. This issue is fixed in version 42.7.12.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1689 Downgrade Attack Defense Impairment
Adversaries may downgrade or use a version of system features that may be outdated, vulnerable, and/or does not support updated security controls.
T1600 Weaken Encryption Defense Impairment
Adversaries may compromise a network device’s encryption capability in order to bypass encryption that would otherwise protect data communications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-42198Same product: Postgresql Postgresql Jdbc Driver
CVE-2025-49146Same product: Postgresql Postgresql Jdbc Driver
CVE-2026-53712Shared CWE-636, CWE-757
CVE-2024-1597Same product: Postgresql Postgresql Jdbc Driver
CVE-2026-6475Same vendor: Postgresql
CVE-2026-6478Same vendor: Postgresql
CVE-2025-59270Shared CWE-757
CVE-2026-6477Same vendor: Postgresql
CVE-2026-6472Same vendor: Postgresql
CVE-2026-6092Shared CWE-757

Affected Assets

postgresql
postgresql jdbc driver
42.7.4 — 42.7.12

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 7 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.2.1
  • V7.4.1
  • V8.3.3
  • V10.3.4

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SC-24 directly requires the system to fail to a known state that preserves security properties, structurally stopping fallback to a less-secure mode.

SI-17 mandates explicit fail-safe procedures that activate on indicated failures, preventing the insecure fallback behavior.

CP-12 forces entry into a safe mode on detected conditions, limiting exposure but not covering every failure path.

Specifying and implementing required cryptography types directly precludes negotiation or acceptance of weaker algorithms.

SA-8 requires application of engineering principles that include fail-secure design, reducing the likelihood the weakness is introduced.

Requiring protection of transmitted confidentiality and integrity forces selection of sufficiently strong negotiated algorithms rather than weaker ones.

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

Secure-development practices explicitly include designing error and failure handling to remain in a secure state.

PR.AA-05 partial match
prevents

Least-privilege policy and enforcement directly counters the permissive-access fallback example in the CWE.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Hardened baselines and configuration management reduce the chance that error paths default to insecure settings.

PR.AA-04 none match
prevents

PR.AA-04 addresses protection/verification of identity assertions in SSO/federation contexts while CWE-757 concerns protocol-level crypto algorithm negotiation, so the control neither prevents nor meaningfully mitigates the weakness.

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 can detect and block algorithm downgrade vulnerabilities before deployment.

mitigates

Ensures network services use secure cryptographic parameters, reducing downgrade risk.

prevents

Mandates use of strong, approved cryptographic algorithms, directly preventing downgrade to weaker ones.

prevents

Secure SDLC practices include selecting strong crypto algorithms during design and implementation.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify minimum cryptographic strength to avoid downgrades.

prevents

Secure architecture principles include enforcing strong algorithm selection in protocol design.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Windows 10 (1 rule)
  • V-220938 The LanMan authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only, and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows 11 (1 rule)
  • V-253462 The LanMan authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only, and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
  • V-225054 The LAN Manager authentication level must be set to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
  • V-205919 Windows Server 2019 LAN Manager authentication level must be configured to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757
Windows Server 2022 (1 rule)
  • V-254475 Windows Server 2022 LAN Manager authentication level must be configured to send NTLMv2 response only and to refuse LM and NTLM. prevents CWE-757

References