CVE-2026-12047 (GCVE-0-2026-12047)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-18 23:37 – Updated: 2026-06-18 23:37
VLAI
Title
pgAdmin 4: HTML injection in cloud verify_credentials / deploy endpoints via unsanitised SDK exception text
Summary
HTML injection in pgAdmin 4's cloud deployment module. The verify_credentials, deploy, regions, and update-server endpoints under /rds/, /azure/, /google/, and the top-level /cloud/ blueprint propagated AWS / Azure / Google SDK exception text — and the related file-resolution and database-commit exception text — into the JSON response body (the info and errormsg fields) without HTML-encoding. The Cloud Wizard frontend rendered these strings through html-react-parser, so an attacker-influenced exception message embedded structural HTML directly into the wizard's DOM. The reported entry point is /rds/verify_credentials/. An authenticated pgAdmin user submits a crafted access_key whose value contains an <iframe/src=...> payload; AWS STS rejects the credential with an IncompleteSignature exception whose text quotes the access_key verbatim; the pgAdmin backend forwards that text into the JSON info field; the Cloud Wizard's FormFooterMessage parses it as HTML. The browser fetches the iframe's src from an attacker-controlled host, and JavaScript executing inside the cross-origin iframe writes to parent.location, redirecting the victim's pgAdmin tab. Because the injection renders inside pgAdmin's own interface, X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors do not mitigate it. Baseline impact is self-targeted (the same user who supplied the payload sees the injection); escalation against other authenticated users requires an additional cross-site request-forgery primitive capable of submitting the malformed credential request with a valid X-pgA-CSRFToken in the victim's browser context. The same unsanitised-error-into-JSON pattern was present across multiple sibling endpoints — Azure's check_cluster_name_availability, every Google endpoint that surfaces SDK errors (verification_ack, projects, regions, instance_types, database_versions, the verify_credentials path-resolution branches), the central /deploy endpoint that bubbles str(e) from deploy_on_rds / deploy_on_azure / deploy_on_google, and update_cloud_server which surfaces the str(e) from a failing db.session.commit — all of which are now covered. Fix HTML-escapes every external/SDK exception string at the endpoint sink via a new shared sanitize_external_text helper (HTML escape with control-character strip), promoted out of the psycopg3 driver into web/pgadmin/utils/text_sanitize.py. The Cloud Wizard frontend additionally renders its FormFooterMessage in plain-text mode for backend-derived strings, so the value is never parsed as HTML even if a future sink forgets the escape. This issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 6.6 before 9.16.
CWE
  • CWE-79 - Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
  • CWE-116 - Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output
Assigner
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
pgadmin.org pgAdmin 4 Affected: 6.6 , < 9.16 (custom)
Create a notification for this product.
Credits
Fernando Bortotti <fernando.bortotti@bsd.com.br> Ashesh Vashi <ashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com>
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "modules": [
            "Cloud Deployment",
            "Cloud RDS",
            "Cloud Azure",
            "Cloud Google"
          ],
          "product": "pgAdmin 4",
          "programFiles": [
            "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/misc/cloud/__init__.py",
            "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/misc/cloud/rds/__init__.py",
            "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/misc/cloud/azure/__init__.py",
            "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/misc/cloud/google/__init__.py",
            "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/blob/master/web/pgadmin/misc/cloud/static/js/CloudWizard.jsx"
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4",
          "vendor": "pgadmin.org",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "9.16",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "6.6",
              "versionType": "custom"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "Fernando Bortotti \u003cfernando.bortotti@bsd.com.br\u003e"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "Ashesh Vashi \u003cashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com\u003e"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "HTML injection in pgAdmin 4\u0027s cloud deployment module. The verify_credentials, deploy, regions, and update-server endpoints under /rds/, /azure/, /google/, and the top-level /cloud/ blueprint propagated AWS / Azure / Google SDK exception text \u2014 and the related file-resolution and database-commit exception text \u2014 into the JSON response body (the info and errormsg fields) without HTML-encoding. The Cloud Wizard frontend rendered these strings through html-react-parser, so an attacker-influenced exception message embedded structural HTML directly into the wizard\u0027s DOM.\n\nThe reported entry point is /rds/verify_credentials/. An authenticated pgAdmin user submits a crafted access_key whose value contains an \u003ciframe/src=...\u003e payload; AWS STS rejects the credential with an IncompleteSignature exception whose text quotes the access_key verbatim; the pgAdmin backend forwards that text into the JSON info field; the Cloud Wizard\u0027s FormFooterMessage parses it as HTML. The browser fetches the iframe\u0027s src from an attacker-controlled host, and JavaScript executing inside the cross-origin iframe writes to parent.location, redirecting the victim\u0027s pgAdmin tab. Because the injection renders inside pgAdmin\u0027s own interface, X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors do not mitigate it. Baseline impact is self-targeted (the same user who supplied the payload sees the injection); escalation against other authenticated users requires an additional cross-site request-forgery primitive capable of submitting the malformed credential request with a valid X-pgA-CSRFToken in the victim\u0027s browser context.\n\nThe same unsanitised-error-into-JSON pattern was present across multiple sibling endpoints \u2014 Azure\u0027s check_cluster_name_availability, every Google endpoint that surfaces SDK errors (verification_ack, projects, regions, instance_types, database_versions, the verify_credentials path-resolution branches), the central /deploy endpoint that bubbles str(e) from deploy_on_rds / deploy_on_azure / deploy_on_google, and update_cloud_server which surfaces the str(e) from a failing db.session.commit \u2014 all of which are now covered.\n\nFix HTML-escapes every external/SDK exception string at the endpoint sink via a new shared sanitize_external_text helper (HTML escape with control-character strip), promoted out of the psycopg3 driver into web/pgadmin/utils/text_sanitize.py. The Cloud Wizard frontend additionally renders its FormFooterMessage in plain-text mode for backend-derived strings, so the value is never parsed as HTML even if a future sink forgets the escape.\n\nThis issue affects pgAdmin 4: from 6.6 before 9.16."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 3.5,
            "baseSeverity": "LOW",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "LOW",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "Self-XSS only. The same authenticated pgAdmin user that submits the crafted cloud credential is the one whose browser renders the echoed error -- there is no third-party attacker driving a distinct victim, so the confused-deputy elements (S:C / C:H confidentiality uplift) do not apply. The frontend DOMPurify layer added by #10068 already neutralises the in-browser exploit; this fix is defence in depth that ensures non-browser JSON consumers (audit logs, scripted API clients) never see the raw markup either. Scored as I:L for that residual escape only; S:U because no authority is crossed.\n\nCross-user escalation would require an independent CSRF primitive capable of submitting the malformed credential request with a valid X-pgA-CSRFToken in the victim\u0027s browser context. That is not part of this defect."
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "baseScore": 4.8,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "Same reasoning as CVSS 3.1 -- self-XSS, no third-party attacker, no scope change. VI:L for the defence-in-depth backend escape that prevents the raw markup from reaching non-browser API consumers; no other impact."
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-79",
              "description": "CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation (\u0027Cross-site Scripting\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            },
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-116",
              "description": "CWE-116 Improper Encoding or Escaping of Output",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T23:37:39.657Z",
        "orgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
        "shortName": "PostgreSQL"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "issue-tracking"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10069"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "patch"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/60d149864b5fdd99675754c7996637737a24fce3"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "EXTERNAL"
      },
      "title": "pgAdmin 4: HTML injection in cloud verify_credentials / deploy endpoints via unsanitised SDK exception text"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007",
    "assignerShortName": "PostgreSQL",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-12047",
    "datePublished": "2026-06-18T23:37:39.657Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-06-11T20:40:07.824Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T23:37:39.657Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…