PostgreSQLDatabase / datastore
CVE-2002-0802
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe multibyte support in PostgreSQL 6.5.x with SQL_ASCII encoding consumes an extra character when processing a character that cannot be converted, which could remove an escape character from the query and make the application subject to SQL injection attacks.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidencePostgreSQL 6.5.x with SQL_ASCII encoding has a flaw in its multibyte character support where it consumes an extra character when processing a character that cannot be converted. This can inadvertently remove escape characters from SQL queries, potentially enabling SQL injection attacks.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
PostgreSQLDatabase / datastore
= 6.5.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed PostgreSQL versionRun `psql --version` or `psql -V` to determine the exact version of the PostgreSQL client and serverAffected if Version is exactly 6.5.0 (the only version listed as affected)
-
Verify database server encodingConnect to the database and run `SHOW server_encoding;` or query `SELECT datencoding FROM pg_database WHERE datname = current_database();`Affected if Encoding is set to SQL_ASCII (the vulnerable encoding)
-
Check client encoding settingRun `SHOW client_encoding;` or inspect the PGCLIENTENCODING environment variableAffected if Client encoding is set to SQL_ASCII or left unset while handling multibyte data
-
Inspect database creation parametersQuery `SELECT datname, datencoding FROM pg_database;` to list all databases and their encoding settingsAffected if Any database uses SQL_ASCII encoding while storing or processing multibyte character data
You are affected if running PostgreSQL 6.5.0 with SQL_ASCII encoding and processing multibyte character data, as the extra character consumption flaw can remove escape characters from SQL queries.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to a supported PostgreSQL version beyond 6.5.x, and ensure proper encoding (such as UTF-8) is configured instead of relying on SQL_ASCII for multibyte data.
Fix this in PostgreSQL
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2002-0802 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2002-0802 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data