CVE Intelligence
Medium Info disclosure

CVE-2026-107313 — pgjdbc stores bytes of earlier messages in place of a large value on GSS-encrypted connections

pgjdbc, the PostgreSQL JDBC Driver, versions 42.7.4 and 42.7.5 can send the previous contents of the GSS send buffer in place of the first part of a value on a connection with GSS encryption (gssEncMode=prefer or require), and the server stores the value without an error. The buffer is 16320 bytes with MIT Kerberos. The stored value then holds bytes of the messages the driver sent just before it on the same connection, such as the statement's SQL text, its other parameters, and earlier rows of the same batch, instead of the bytes the application supplied. Values at least as long as the buffer are affected when the driver writes them from a byte array: bind parameters set with setString, setBytes, or a ByteStreamWriter, CopyIn.writeToCopy, and LargeObject.write. Most such writes fail with an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException instead. The default, gssEncMode=allow, does not start GSS encryption, and connections without GSS encryption are not affected. Versions 42.7.3 and earlier are not affected, and 42.7.6 fixes the problem.

Published Oct 7, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: PostgreSQL

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.1% (30-day exploitation probability)+0
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.14%
ahead of 3% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Pgjdbc
Pgjdbc
CVSS base
4.2
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Pgjdbc Pgjdbc).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (info disclosure), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Pgjdbc Pgjdbc ≥ 42.7.4 and < 42.7.6 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
4.2 CVSS 3.1 Medium 1.6 2.5 f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
4.2 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — PostgreSQL via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: f86ef6dc-4d3a-42ad-8f28-e6d5547a5007)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-201 · Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.14%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Look for anomalous data read/export volumes and access to sensitive records.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsauthentication logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · pgjdbc/pgjdbc
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 4.2
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Oct 7, 2026 · PostgreSQL

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

3 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Pgjdbc
every CVE for this vendor
Info disclosure
same class
CWE-201
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Medium CVE-2026-107315 pgjdbc pads a value shorter than its declared length with bytes of earlier statements (rather than zeros) 8d
  • Medium CVE-2026-107314 pgjdbc does not enforce requireAuth when the value excludes every authentication method 8d
  • Medium CVE-2026-54291 Silent channel-binding authentication downgrade via unsupported certificate algorithms Jul 6, 2026
  • High CVE-2026-42198 pgjdbc: Unbounded PBKDF2 iterations in SCRAM authentication allows CPU exhaustion DoS Apr 29, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-107313 is "pgjdbc stores bytes of earlier messages in place of a large value on GSS-encrypted connections", rated Medium. It affects Pgjdbc (Pgjdbc); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 4.2 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.14% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.