A critical remote code execution vulnerability has been identified in pgAdmin4, the widely-deployed open-source administration platform for PostgreSQL database systems. Designated as CVE-2025-12762, this security flaw affects all versions through 9.9 and enables authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying server infrastructure. With a CVSS score of 9.3, this vulnerability poses an immediate threat to enterprise database environments worldwide.
Vulnerability Overview
Technical Identification
CVE: CVE-2025-12762
CWE Classification: CWE-94 (Improper Control of Generation of Code)
CVSS v3.1 Score: 9.3 (Critical)
Affected Versions: pgAdmin4 ≤ 9.9
Patched Version: pgAdmin4 10.0
Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerability Discovery Timeline
The flaw was documented in GitHub issue #9320 by the pgAdmin development team and subsequently assigned an official CVE identifier. The rapid response from developers resulted in a remediation commit (1d39739) that addresses the root cause and forms the foundation of version 10.0’s security improvements.
Attack Mechanism Analysis
The Restore Process Vulnerability
pgAdmin4’s vulnerability manifests during the database restoration workflow, specifically when processing PLAIN-format dump files. These dump files represent a standard PostgreSQL backup format, commonly employed for:
- Database migration between servers
- Disaster recovery operations
- Development environment synchronization
- Periodic backup procedures
The security weakness emerges from pgAdmin’s handling of these backup files during server-mode restoration operations.
Code Injection Vector
The vulnerability stems from insufficient input sanitization during the command construction phase of the restore process. When pgAdmin processes a PLAIN-format dump file, it generates and executes system-level commands to restore database contents. However, the application fails to adequately validate and sanitize user-supplied data within these dump files.
An attacker can craft a malicious dump file containing injected commands. When pgAdmin processes this file, the injected code is incorporated into the generated system commands without proper escaping or validation. Upon execution, these commands run with the privileges of the pgAdmin process, potentially granting attackers complete control over the host server.
Attack Prerequisites
The exploitation pathway requires:
- Authentication: Attacker must possess valid pgAdmin credentials
- Network Access: Ability to reach the pgAdmin interface (typically port 80/443)
- Malicious Payload: Crafted PLAIN-format dump file with injected commands
- Server Mode: pgAdmin must be operating in server mode (standard for enterprise deployments)
Notably absent from the prerequisites:
- Administrative privileges (low-level user access suffices)
- User interaction or social engineering
- Complex exploit chains or race conditions
This combination makes the vulnerability particularly dangerous—it requires minimal sophistication to exploit while delivering maximum impact.
Risk Assessment
CVSS v3.1 Vector Breakdown
Vector String: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:M/A:M
Attack Vector (AV:N): Network-based exploitation allows remote attackers to compromise systems without physical access or local account requirements beyond network authentication.
Attack Complexity (AC:L): Low complexity indicates that specialized conditions are unnecessary for successful exploitation. Standard pgAdmin configurations are vulnerable without requiring race conditions or timing attacks.
Privileges Required (PR:L): Low privilege requirements mean that standard authenticated users—not administrative accounts—can exploit this vulnerability. This significantly expands the potential attacker pool within organizations.
User Interaction (UI:N): No user interaction is required. Once the attacker submits the malicious dump file, the exploitation proceeds automatically without administrator involvement.
Scope (S:C): Changed scope indicates that successful exploitation impacts resources beyond the vulnerable component itself. Code execution on the host system affects the entire server infrastructure, not merely the pgAdmin application.
Confidentiality Impact (C:H): High confidentiality impact reflects the attacker’s ability to access all data available to the pgAdmin process, including database credentials, connection strings, and potentially sensitive database contents.
Integrity Impact (I:M): Moderate integrity impact acknowledges that attackers can modify system files and database contents, though some limitations may exist based on process permissions.
Availability Impact (A:M): Moderate availability impact recognizes that attackers can disrupt database services, though complete system-wide denial of service may require additional steps.
Real-World Threat Scenarios
Data Exfiltration: Attackers gaining code execution can access PostgreSQL database files directly, bypassing application-level access controls and audit logging. This enables wholesale database theft without triggering connection-based monitoring.
Lateral Movement: Compromised database servers often serve as pivot points for broader network penetration. Attackers can leverage database server access to reach backend systems, internal APIs, and other infrastructure components.
Persistence Establishment: Code execution capabilities allow attackers to install backdoors, create additional user accounts, or modify system configurations to maintain long-term access even after the initial vulnerability is patched.
Ransomware Deployment: Database servers represent high-value ransomware targets. Attackers can encrypt database files, backup systems, and related infrastructure, then demand ransom for restoration keys.
Supply Chain Attacks: Compromised database servers in development or CI/CD environments can facilitate supply chain attacks through malicious code injection into software artifacts and deployment pipelines.
Technical Deep Dive
CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code
This vulnerability exemplifies CWE-94, a weakness pattern where applications dynamically generate code or commands from user-influenced data sources without proper validation. The specific manifestation in pgAdmin follows this sequence:
- User Input: Attacker uploads malicious PLAIN-format dump file
- Parsing: pgAdmin extracts restoration commands from the dump file
- Code Generation: System commands are constructed incorporating dump file contents
- Execution: Generated commands execute with pgAdmin process privileges
- Compromise: Injected attacker code runs on the host system
Why Database Tools Are Particularly Vulnerable
Database administration tools face unique security challenges that contributed to this vulnerability:
Privileged Operations: Database restore operations inherently require elevated privileges to manipulate filesystem resources, modify system configurations, and execute low-level database operations.
Complex Data Handling: Dump files contain SQL commands, schema definitions, and potentially binary data. Parsing and processing this complex data increases the attack surface for injection vulnerabilities.
Backward Compatibility: Support for legacy dump formats and restoration methods may preserve unsafe implementations for compatibility reasons.
Performance Optimization: Developers may optimize for restore speed by using direct system command execution rather than safer but slower approaches.
Trust Assumptions: Dump files are often implicitly trusted as “database data” rather than “user input,” leading to relaxed validation compared to typical web form processing.
Enterprise Impact Analysis
Deployment Patterns at Risk
Server-Mode Deployments: Enterprise organizations typically deploy pgAdmin in server mode, making it accessible to multiple database administrators through a web interface. This configuration pattern is precisely the deployment method vulnerable to CVE-2025-12762.
Shared Administrative Platforms: Organizations consolidating database administration often grant multiple users access to shared pgAdmin instances. A single compromised user account can threaten the entire database infrastructure.
DevOps Integration: Modern DevOps pipelines frequently incorporate automated database restore operations for environment provisioning and testing. Malicious dump files introduced into these pipelines can compromise the entire software delivery infrastructure.
Threat Modeling Considerations
Internal Threat Vectors: Disgruntled employees or contractors with legitimate pgAdmin access can exploit this vulnerability without requiring sophisticated attack techniques or privileged accounts.
Compromised Accounts: Attackers who compromise low-privilege database user credentials through phishing or credential stuffing immediately gain a potential pathway to full server compromise.
Supply Chain Risks: Organizations accepting database dumps from partners, vendors, or external sources face supply chain attack risks if these dumps are processed through vulnerable pgAdmin instances.
Mitigation Strategy
Immediate Response Actions
Priority 1: Version Upgrade Organizations must prioritize upgrading to pgAdmin4 version 10.0 or later. The development team’s fix in commit 1d39739 addresses the root cause of the vulnerability through improved input validation and command construction.
Upgrade Steps:
- Review current pgAdmin version:
pgadmin4 --version - Backup existing configurations and user databases
- Download pgAdmin4 10.0 from official sources
- Test upgrade in non-production environment
- Schedule maintenance window for production upgrade
- Deploy upgraded version with security validation
- Verify functionality of critical restore operations
Priority 2: Temporary Risk Mitigation
For organizations unable to immediately upgrade:
Disable PLAIN-Format Restores: If organizational requirements permit, temporarily disable support for PLAIN-format dump files. While this impacts operational workflows, it eliminates the attack vector.
Restrict Network Access: Implement stricter network segmentation to limit pgAdmin access to trusted networks and hosts. Use VPN requirements or IP allowlisting to reduce exposure.
Enhanced Monitoring: Deploy monitoring specifically for:
- Unusual restore operations during off-hours
- Restore operations from unexpected IP addresses
- System command execution anomalies on database servers
- Unexpected child processes spawned by pgAdmin
Priority 3: Access Control Review
Principle of Least Privilege: Audit pgAdmin user accounts and reduce privileges to the minimum necessary for each user’s job function. Remove unused or dormant accounts that could serve as compromise vectors.
Authentication Strengthening: Implement multi-factor authentication for all pgAdmin access. Given the low privilege requirement for exploitation, strong authentication becomes critical.
Session Management: Configure aggressive session timeouts and force reauthentication for sensitive operations like database restoration.
Long-Term Security Improvements
Dump File Validation Framework
Implement organizational policies requiring validation of dump files before restoration:
- Cryptographic signature verification for dump files
- Virus and malware scanning
- Format validation tools to detect anomalies
- Provenance tracking for backup files
Alternative Restore Methods
Evaluate safer alternatives to PLAIN-format restores:
- Use custom-format dumps with binary encoding
- Implement database-native replication for environment synchronization
- Deploy containerized database snapshots rather than text-format dumps
- Utilize cloud-native database backup services
Security Architecture Review
Database Server Hardening: Reduce the impact of potential compromise by:
- Running pgAdmin with minimal necessary privileges
- Implementing mandatory access controls (SELinux, AppArmor)
- Containerizing database management tools
- Separating administrative interfaces from production networks
Monitoring and Detection
Deploy comprehensive security monitoring:
- File integrity monitoring on database servers
- System call auditing for database processes
- Network traffic analysis for database communications
- Anomaly detection for administrative operations
Vulnerability Context and Industry Implications
Broader Database Security Concerns
This vulnerability highlights systemic issues in database administration tooling:
Code Injection in Restore Operations: Many database platforms and management tools implement restore functionality through command generation and execution. pgAdmin’s vulnerability likely indicates similar weaknesses in other database tools that warrant investigation.
Input Validation in DevOps Tools: As DevOps practices incorporate more automated operations, tools must treat all inputs—including traditionally “trusted” sources like backup files—with appropriate skepticism and validation.
The Trust Boundary Problem: Organizations often implicitly trust data categorized as “backups” or “database exports,” creating blind spots in security validation processes.
Lessons for Database Security
Assume Malicious Input: Security architectures must assume that any user-influenced data, regardless of format or source, may be malicious. Dump files, configuration files, and backup archives all represent potential attack vectors.
Defense in Depth: Single-layer security controls proved insufficient. Organizations must implement multiple defensive layers including input validation, privilege minimization, monitoring, and network segmentation.
Secure-by-Default Design: Database tools should implement secure configurations as defaults, requiring explicit configuration to enable potentially dangerous operations rather than requiring explicit configuration to disable them.
Detection and Response
Indicators of Compromise
Security teams should investigate for signs of exploitation:
Log Analysis:
- Unusual restore operations in pgAdmin logs
- System command execution patterns inconsistent with normal operations
- Process creation anomalies (unexpected child processes of pgAdmin)
- File access patterns indicating system file enumeration
System Forensics:
- Recently created user accounts on database servers
- Modifications to system cron jobs or startup scripts
- Network connections from database servers to unusual destinations
- Presence of webshells or backdoor utilities
Database Analysis:
- Creation of unexpected database users with elevated privileges
- Modification of stored procedures or triggers
- Unexplained data exports or large query operations
- Changes to connection permissions or authentication methods
Incident Response Procedures
If compromise is suspected:
- Immediate Containment:
- Isolate affected database servers from the network
- Disable pgAdmin access while investigation proceeds
- Preserve system logs and memory dumps for forensic analysis
- Impact Assessment:
- Identify which databases and data were accessed
- Determine if data exfiltration occurred
- Assess whether lateral movement to other systems happened
- Evaluate integrity of database contents and backups
- Remediation:
- Rebuild compromised systems from clean backups
- Force password resets for all administrative accounts
- Upgrade to pgAdmin 10.0 before restoring service
- Implement enhanced monitoring before returning to production
- Post-Incident Analysis:
- Document the attack timeline and methods
- Identify security control failures that enabled compromise
- Update incident response procedures based on lessons learned
- Conduct threat hunting to ensure no residual attacker presence
Compliance and Regulatory Considerations
Data Breach Notification
Organizations experiencing exploitation must consider notification obligations:
GDPR: If personal data was accessed, notification to supervisory authorities and affected individuals may be required within 72 hours of discovery.
Industry-Specific Regulations: Healthcare (HIPAA), financial services (GLBA, PCI-DSS), and other regulated industries have specific breach notification requirements.
State Laws: Many jurisdictions maintain data breach notification laws with varying timelines and requirements.
Audit Trail Requirements
This vulnerability may impact compliance audit findings:
Access Control Effectiveness: Auditors may question whether the organization implemented appropriate access controls given the low privilege requirement for exploitation.
Vulnerability Management: Organizations must demonstrate timely patching of critical vulnerabilities to satisfy various compliance frameworks.
Monitoring Requirements: Some frameworks require specific monitoring capabilities that would detect or prevent exploitation of this vulnerability.
Vendor Response and Disclosure
pgAdmin Development Team Actions
The pgAdmin team demonstrated responsible security practices:
- Prompt acknowledgment and documentation of the vulnerability
- Rapid development and testing of remediation
- Clear communication of affected versions and upgrade paths
- Transparent disclosure through GitHub security advisories
Coordinated Disclosure Timeline
This vulnerability followed responsible disclosure practices, allowing organizations time to prepare patches and updates before public disclosure of exploitation techniques.
Conclusion
CVE-2025-12762 represents a critical security vulnerability affecting a fundamental tool in PostgreSQL database administration. The combination of high severity, low exploitation complexity, and widespread deployment makes this vulnerability an immediate priority for organizations using pgAdmin4.
The flaw underscores the importance of treating all user-influenced data—including traditionally trusted sources like backup files—as potentially malicious. As database systems continue to serve as the foundation of critical applications and sensitive data repositories, securing database administration tools must receive commensurate attention and resources.
Organizations should view the immediate upgrade to pgAdmin4 10.0 not merely as routine maintenance but as a critical security operation. The ease of exploitation and severity of impact leave no room for delayed response.
Beyond addressing this specific vulnerability, security teams should leverage this incident as an opportunity to review broader database security architectures, administration tool configurations, and access control policies. The lessons learned extend well beyond pgAdmin to encompass the entire database security ecosystem.
Actionable Takeaways
For Security Teams:
- ✓ Immediately identify all pgAdmin4 deployments in your environment
- ✓ Prioritize upgrade to version 10.0 or later
- ✓ Implement enhanced monitoring for database restore operations
- ✓ Review and restrict administrative access to minimal necessary users
- ✓ Deploy multi-factor authentication for all database administration tools
For Database Administrators:
- ✓ Validate the source and integrity of all dump files before restoration
- ✓ Use alternative restore methods where possible
- ✓ Maintain separate administrative networks for database management
- ✓ Implement comprehensive logging of all administrative operations
For Management:
- ✓ Allocate resources for emergency patching of database infrastructure
- ✓ Evaluate security posture of all database administration tools
- ✓ Consider third-party security assessments of database environments
- ✓ Review incident response procedures for database compromise scenarios
Additional Resources
Official References:
- pgAdmin4 Security Advisory: GitHub Issue #9320
- CVE-2025-12762: National Vulnerability Database Entry
- pgAdmin4 10.0 Release Notes and Patch Details
- Remediation Commit: 1d39739
Further Reading:
- CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code
- OWASP: Injection Prevention Cheat Sheet
- PostgreSQL Security Best Practices
- Database Backup Security Guidelines
Severity Classification: Critical
Exploitation Status: Proof of Concept Available
Recommended Action: Immediate Upgrade Required
Risk to Organization: High