CVE-2022-1552

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Description

A flaw was found in PostgreSQL. There is an issue with incomplete efforts to operate safely when a privileged user is maintaining another user's objects. The Autovacuum, REINDEX, CREATE INDEX, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, CLUSTER, and pg_amcheck commands activated relevant protections too late or not at all during the process. This flaw allows an attacker with permission to create non-temporary objects in at least one schema to execute arbitrary SQL functions under a superuser identity.

A flaw was found in PostgreSQL. There is an issue with incomplete efforts to operate safely when a privileged user is maintaining another user's objects. The Autovacuum, REINDEX, CREATE INDEX, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, CLUSTER, and pg_amcheck commands activated relevant protections too late or not at all during the process. This flaw allows an attacker with permission to create non-temporary objects in at least one schema to execute arbitrary SQL functions under a superuser identity.

Mitigation

Red Hat has investigated whether a possible mitigation exists for this issue, and has not been able to identify a practical example. Please update the affected package as soon as possible.

Additional information

  • Bugzilla 2081126: postgresql: Autovacuum, REINDEX, and others omit "security restricted operation" sandbox
  • CWE-459->CWE-89: Incomplete Cleanup leads to Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
  • FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2022-1552

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

Important note

CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
Red HatNVD

CVSS v3 Base Score

8.8

8.8

Attack Vector

Network

Network

Attack Complexity

Low

Low

Privileges Required

Low

Low

User Interaction

None

None

Scope

Unchanged

Unchanged

Confidentiality Impact

High

High

Integrity Impact

High

High

Availability Impact

High

High

CVSS v3 Vector

Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Understanding the Weakness (CWE)

CWE-459

Other,Confidentiality,Integrity

Technical Impact: Other; Read Application Data; Modify Application Data; DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)

It is possible to overflow the number of temporary files because directories typically have limits on the number of files allowed. This could create a denial of service problem.

CWE-89

Confidentiality,Integrity,Availability

Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands

Adversaries could execute system commands, typically by changing the SQL statement to redirect output to a file that can then be executed.

Confidentiality

Technical Impact: Read Application Data

Since SQL databases generally hold sensitive data, loss of confidentiality is a frequent problem with SQL injection vulnerabilities.

Authentication

Technical Impact: Gain Privileges or Assume Identity; Bypass Protection Mechanism

If poor SQL commands are used to check user names and passwords or perform other kinds of authentication, it may be possible to connect to the product as another user with no previous knowledge of the password.

Access Control

Technical Impact: Bypass Protection Mechanism

If authorization information is held in a SQL database, it may be possible to change this information through the successful exploitation of a SQL injection vulnerability.

Integrity

Technical Impact: Modify Application Data

Just as it may be possible to read sensitive information, it is also possible to modify or even delete this information with a SQL injection attack.

Acknowledgements

Upstream acknowledges Alexander Lakhin as the original reporter.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

What is a mitigation?

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.