Re:PostgreSQL 18.7, 17.12, 16.16, 15.20, 14.25, and 19 RC 2 ...
by zulux on Thursday November 12, 2026 @10:29AM
(#50468994)
Mega patches like this, in my opinion, should be treated as mandatory patches. If I were trying to get a significant security update into the field in the age of LLM drama, this is how I would do it.
Re:PostgreSQL 18.7, 17.12, 16.16, 15.20, 14.25, and 19 RC 2 ...
by ianberdin on Thursday November 12, 2026 @12:09PM
(#50470621)
Looking at all these security patches reminded me of when I was a kid and I thoroughly cleaned my apartment, wiped away every bit of dust in every single crevice, and then a couple of days later it was all back again. And I thought: am I really going to be doing this my whole life?
Re:PostgreSQL 18.7, 17.12, 16.16, 15.20, 14.25, and 19 RC 2 ...
by lfittl on Thursday November 12, 2026 @12:30PM
(#50470926)
FWIW, I found it easier to look at the release notes (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/release/18.7/) to understand the overall scope of the CVEs - from the announcement the individual CVE pages are linked, but its hard to scan.
Re:PostgreSQL 18.7, 17.12, 16.16, 15.20, 14.25, and 19 RC 2 ...
by firer on Thursday November 12, 2026 @02:13PM
(#50472612)
All of these seem to be post-auth, except for CVE-2026-116322 (which doesn't grant code execution, "only" a DoS).
About a year ago I found and exploited CVE-2026-2004, which is also a Postgres post-auth RCE, as part of Wiz's zeroday.cloud competition.
I choose that target because it immediately stood out as highly complex with lots of user input. In my opinion, it's a bad idea to define this as a security boundary in the first place. Access to a database can very likely lead to code execution - there's way too much attack surface.
Most serious cloud providers rightly sandbox their DB offerings exactly for this reason. And this year's zeroday.cloud competition no longer has authenticated Postgres as a target, exactly for this reason.
Re:PostgreSQL 18.7, 17.12, 16.16, 15.20, 14.25, and 19 RC 2 ...
by ejazarain on Friday November 13, 2026 @08:48AM
(#50483444)
The benefit of AI testing security has exposed every app out there and the vulnerabilities that hid for years are revealing them so quickly and so accurately that has shaken everyone for good and fixing them will definitely make the data safer. Well done PG community for being quick to respond. at least i go and sleep as i used sleep :)
So, yes, if you're running multi-tenant Postgres as a public service, you should upgrade. Everyone else is in no rush.
Yes, the application above it should prevent SQL injection, but if it's imperfect, you don't want an attacker to turn SQL injection into RCE.
About a year ago I found and exploited CVE-2026-2004, which is also a Postgres post-auth RCE, as part of Wiz's zeroday.cloud competition.
I choose that target because it immediately stood out as highly complex with lots of user input. In my opinion, it's a bad idea to define this as a security boundary in the first place. Access to a database can very likely lead to code execution - there's way too much attack surface.
Most serious cloud providers rightly sandbox their DB offerings exactly for this reason. And this year's zeroday.cloud competition no longer has authenticated Postgres as a target, exactly for this reason.