PostgreSQLDatabase / datastore
CVE-2024-0985
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 · uneditedLate privilege drop in REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY in PostgreSQL allows an object creator to execute arbitrary SQL functions as the command issuer. The command intends to run SQL functions as the owner of the materialized view, enabling safe refresh of untrusted materialized views. The victim is a superuser or member of one of the attacker's roles. The attack requires luring the victim into running REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY on the attacker's materialized view. Versions before PostgreSQL 16.2, 15.6, 14.11, 13.14, and 12.18 are affected.
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 confidenceA late privilege drop vulnerability in PostgreSQL's REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY command allows an attacker who creates a malicious materialized view to execute arbitrary SQL functions as the victim user (who must be a superuser or member of the attacker's role) when they run the refresh command. The command incorrectly retains elevated privileges beyond the intended point, enabling the attacker to inject and execute SQL as the victim.
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
>= 12.0, < 12.18>= 13.0, < 13.14>= 14.0, < 14.11>= 15.0, < 15.6CVSS 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
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 your PostgreSQL versionRun `SELECT version();` or `SHOW server_version_num;` to get the installed version numberAffected if The version is >= 12.0 and < 12.18, OR >= 13.0 and < 13.14, OR >= 14.0 and < 14.11, OR >= 15.0 and < 15.6
-
Identify materialized views in your databaseQuery `SELECT schemaname, matviewname FROM pg_matviews;` to list all materialized viewsAffected if Any materialized views exist that were created by untrusted users or could be malicious
-
Check for superuser accounts or role membershipsRun `SELECT rolname, rolsuper FROM pg_roles WHERE rolsuper = true;` and `SELECT roleid, member FROM pg_auth_members;` to identify superusers and role membershipsAffected if There are superusers or users who are members of roles they do not own, as this enables the privilege escalation
-
Review recent REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY usageExamine PostgreSQL logs for statements containing `REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY` to see who executed themAffected if Superusers or privileged users have executed REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY on materialized views they did not create
You are affected if your PostgreSQL version falls within the vulnerable ranges AND you have materialized views created by untrusted users that could be refreshed by superusers or users with role memberships.
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.
dbcve · scoped12.1813.1414.11
Upgrade PostgreSQL to version 16.2, 15.6, 14.11, 13.14, or 12.18 or later. Additionally, avoid running REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY on untrusted materialized views as superusers or with elevated privileges.
Upgrade to PostgreSQL 12.18, 13.14, 14.11, 15.6, or 16.2+ (choose the corresponding fixed release for your current major version branch)
- 1. Identify current PostgreSQL version using: SELECT version();
- 2. Plan upgrade based on current version - choose the fixed release for your major version branch
- 3. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- 4. Perform a full backup of all databases before upgrading
- 5. Upgrade PostgreSQL to the fixed version: 12.18, 13.14, 14.11, 15.6, or 16.2+
- 6. After upgrade, verify the version: SELECT version();
- 7. Test that REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY works correctly with the new version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in PostgreSQL
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-0985 — 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-2024-0985 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