CVE-2016-5423
What it is
PostgreSQL before 9.1.23, 9.2.x before 9.2.18, 9.3.x before 9.3.14, 9.4.x before 9.4.9, and 9.5.x before 9.5.4 allow remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and server crash), obtain sensitive memory information, or possibly execute arbitrary code via (1) a CASE expression within the test value subexpression of another CASE or (2) inlining of an SQL function that implements the equality operator used for a CASE expression involving values of different types.
At a glance
- Exploitability
- Can be exploited over the network with a low-privilege account. High risk of data tampering, service disruption.
- Exploit odds
- 6.0% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.
Timeline
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- Last updatedMost recent change to the record
Why it ranks here
- Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
- Exploit odds: 6.0% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Severity: 8.3 HIGH (CVSS).
- Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 6.0% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Weakness
- CWE-476 · NULL pointer dereference
- Record status
- Modified
Affected
- Debian Linux 8.0
- PostgreSQL ≤ 9.1.22
- PostgreSQL 9.2
- PostgreSQL 9.2.1
- PostgreSQL 9.2.2
- PostgreSQL 9.2.3
- PostgreSQL 9.2.4
- PostgreSQL 9.2.5
Attack profile CVSS 3.0 · 8.3
- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Raw vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
Is it in your code?
Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.
Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2016-5423.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2016-5423. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
Fix and advisories
- https://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1688/
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-1-23.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-2-18.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-3-14.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-4-9.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-5-4.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1688/
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-1-23.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-2-18.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-3-14.html
References
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1781.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1820.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1821.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2606.html
- http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3646
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92433
- http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1036617
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2425
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364001
- https://security.gentoo.org/glsa/201701-33
- https://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1688/
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-1-23.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-2-18.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-3-14.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-4-9.html
- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-9-5-4.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1781.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1820.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-1821.html
- http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-2606.html
- http://www.debian.org/security/2016/dsa-3646
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/92433
- http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1036617
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2425
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1364001