dbcve.org
PostgreSQLDatabase / datastore

CVE-2014-0061

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v2.0 Published 2014-03-31
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 8.4.19 or later.
See remediation →
71/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The validator functions for the procedural languages (PLs) in PostgreSQL before 8.4.20, 9.0.x before 9.0.16, 9.1.x before 9.1.12, 9.2.x before 9.2.7, and 9.3.x before 9.3.3 allow remote authenticated users to gain privileges via a function that is (1) defined in another language or (2) not allowed to be directly called by the user due to permissions.

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 · high confidence

PostgreSQL's validator functions for procedural languages (PLs) contain a privilege escalation flaw. Authenticated remote users can call functions they shouldn't have access to by leveraging validator functions for PLs, either because the target function is defined in another language or because permissions explicitly block direct user calls. This allows privilege escalation beyond what the user's role should permit.

MitigationUpgrade PostgreSQL to version 8.4.20, 9.0.16, 9.1.12, 9.2.7, 9.3.3 or later. Alternatively, restrict which users can create or modify procedural language functions and review existing user-defined functions for unauthorized access paths.

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
Affected:<= 8.4.19= 8.4.1= 8.4.2= 8.4.3= 8.4.4= 8.4.5= 8.4.6= 8.4.7= 8.4.8= 8.4.9= 8.4.10= 8.4.11

CVSS 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
Single
Confidentiality
Partial
Integrity
Partial
Availability
Partial

AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine installed PostgreSQL version
    Run: psql -c 'SELECT version();' or check pg_ctl --version
    Affected if Version is 8.4.x <= 8.4.19 or matches the specific affected versions listed (8.4.1 through 8.4.11)
  2. Identify installed procedural languages
    Query: SELECT lanname, lanpltrusted FROM pg_language WHERE lanname IN ('plpgsql','plperl','plpython','pltcl');
    Affected if Any trusted procedural language is installed (plpgsql is default in many installations)
  3. Check which users can create functions in procedural languages
    Query: SELECT rolname FROM pg_roles WHERE rolname NOT LIKE 'pg_%' AND rolname NOT IN ('postgres') EXCEPT SELECT rolname FROM pg_authid WHERE rolname IN (SELECT member::regrole::text FROM pg_auth_members WHERE roleid = (SELECT oid FROM pg_roles WHERE rolname = 'pg_execute_server_program')); Or review pg_proc and pg_language privileges.
    Affected if Non-superuser roles have permission to create functions in procedural languages
  4. Audit existing user-defined functions in procedural languages
    Query: SELECT proname, pronamespace::regnamespace::text as schema, prolang::reglanguage::text as language, proname FROM pg_proc WHERE prolang IN (SELECT oid FROM pg_language WHERE lanpltrusted = true) AND pronamespace NOT IN (SELECT oid FROM pg_namespace WHERE nspname LIKE 'pg_%');
    Affected if There are user-defined functions in trusted procedural languages that could serve as escalation vectors

Your PostgreSQL instance is affected if it is version 8.4.x at or below 8.4.19 AND non-superuser authenticated users have the ability to create or execute functions in procedural languages like plpgsql.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 8.4.19
Interim mitigation

Upgrade PostgreSQL to version 8.4.20, 9.0.16, 9.1.12, 9.2.7, 9.3.3 or later. Alternatively, restrict which users can create or modify procedural language functions and review existing user-defined functions for unauthorized access paths.

Fix this in PostgreSQL Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,580
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,128.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-0061 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2014-0061 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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