Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

PostgreSQL SET ROLE SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION reset to wrong user ID

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged ...

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. A...

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. ...

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An

PostgreSQL row security below e.g. subqueries disregards user ID changes

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a ...

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. ...

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации