Vulnerability from bitnami_vulndb
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 attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Bitnami",
"name": "postgresql",
"purl": "pkg:bitnami/postgresql"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "13.17.0"
},
{
"introduced": "14.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "14.14.0"
},
{
"introduced": "15.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "15.9.0"
},
{
"introduced": "16.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "16.5.0"
},
{
"introduced": "17.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "17.1.0"
}
],
"type": "SEMVER"
}
],
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-10976"
],
"database_specific": {
"cpes": [
"cpe:2.3:a:postgresql:postgresql:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
],
"severity": "Medium"
},
"details": "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 attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application\u0027s pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.",
"id": "BIT-postgresql-2024-10976",
"modified": "2025-11-06T13:25:46.476Z",
"published": "2024-11-16T07:16:59.886Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.postgresql.org/support/security/CVE-2024-10976/"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-10976"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20250509-0010/"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/11/msg00011.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.5.0",
"summary": "PostgreSQL row security below e.g. subqueries disregards user ID changes"
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.