CVE-2025-22248
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 bitnami/pgpool Docker image, and the bitnami/postgres-ha k8s chart, under default configurations, comes with an 'repmgr' user that allows unauthenticated access to the database inside the cluster. The PGPOOL_SR_CHECK_USER is the user that Pgpool itself uses to perform streaming replication checks against nodes, and should not be at trust level. This allows to log into a PostgreSQL database using the repgmr user without authentication. If Pgpool is exposed externally, a potential attacker could use this user to get access to the service. This is also present within the bitnami/postgres-ha Kubernetes Helm chart.
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 confidenceThe bitnami/pgpool Docker image and bitnami/postgres-ha Kubernetes Helm chart configure the 'repmgr' user with trust authentication (no password required) by default. This user is intended for streaming replication checks but should not have unauthenticated access. If Pgpool is exposed externally, attackers can connect to PostgreSQL without credentials using the repmgr account.
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< 16.0.0< 4.6.0-1CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 Bitnami pgpool image versionRun 'docker images' or inspect the deployed image tag in your Kubernetes manifest/YAML to find the exact version of bitnami/pgpool or bitnami/postgres-ha being usedAffected if Version is below 4.6.0-1 for pgpool or the base image version is below 16.0.0
-
Verify repmgr user authentication method in pg_hba.confLocate and examine the pg_hba.conf file (typically in /opt/bitnami/postgres/conf/ or mounted ConfigMap) and search for entries containing 'repmgr' user - check the authentication method columnAffected if Any line with 'repmgr' shows 'trust' as the authentication method, meaning no password is required
-
Check if Pgpool is externally accessibleReview Kubernetes Service definitions or Docker port mappings to determine if Pgpool (port 5432 or 5433) is exposed via LoadBalancer, NodePort, or host network binding that permits external access beyond the clusterAffected if Pgpool is exposed via LoadBalancer, NodePort, or bound to 0.0.0.0 with external network access permitted
-
Inspect Helm chart values for repmgr authenticationReview the deployed bitnami/postgres-ha Helm chart values.yaml or running configuration to see if repmgr authentication is explicitly set to 'trust' or left at defaultAffected if Chart values do not override the default trust authentication for repmgr, or explicitly configure 'trust' method
Environment is affected if using a vulnerable Bitnami version AND the repmgr user has trust authentication AND Pgpool is accessible from outside the cluster
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 · scoped4.6.0-116.0.0
Change the authentication method for the repmgr user from 'trust' to 'md5' or 'scram-sha-256' in the pg_hba.conf or Helm chart values, and ensure Pgpool is not exposed externally beyond the cluster.
bitnami/pgpool:4.6.0-1 or later; bitnami/postgres-ha chart: 16.0.0 or later
- Upgrade the bitnami/pgpool Docker image to version 4.6.0-1 or later
- Upgrade the bitnami/postgres-ha Helm chart to version 16.0.0 or later (for Kubernetes deployments)
- After upgrading, verify that the pg_hba.conf configuration no longer has 'trust' authentication method for the repmgr user or PGPOOL_SR_CHECK_USER
- If using custom configurations, ensure pg_hba.conf explicitly requires authentication (md5, scram-sha-256, or cert) for all user connections
- Restart the pgpool and PostgreSQL services to apply the new configuration
- Confirm external access using the repmgr user without a password is no longer possible
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-22248 — 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-2025-22248 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