CVE-2026-116242

HIGHPre-NVD 8.28.2
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 8.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). No GitHub Security Advisory CVSS is on record for this CVE.

Triggered by: Headline CVSS from a secondary CVSS source
Sources: a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 3 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-114383 (ENISA EUVD)Source: ENISA EUVD

8.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 8.2Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

An upstream fix is merged but not yet released — mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation) until the release ships, then apply it.

pgAdmin 4 opens SSH tunnels with the sshtunnel library but gave it neither host_pkey_directories nor ssh_config_file, so it always loaded the unencrypted private keys in ~/.ssh of the operating-system account running pgAdmin, read that account's ~/.ssh/config (IdentityFile, User, HostName, ProxyCommand) for the tunnel host, and could use its ssh-agent. In server mode any user could therefore configure a tunnel to a host that accepts the service account's key, with no credentials of their own or with an identity file that did not exist in their storage, and reach it as that account.

The fix makes tunnels in server mode use only the identity file or password the user configured: the service account's keys, configuration and agent are no longer used, and an identity file that cannot be found in the user's storage is reported instead of falling back to ~/.ssh. Desktop mode is unchanged.

This issue affects pgAdmin 4: before 9.19.

CVSS v3
8.2
EG Score
8.2HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
37
EG Risk 37/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity82% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.2 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines until it ships, then apply the release.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (8.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 8.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
8.2 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.a secondary CVSS source · CVSS v3.0 or v3.1
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines until it ships, then apply the release.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 30, 2026

Last Modified

October 30, 2026

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 30, 2026
Upstream fix merged — awaiting tagged release. Sources: github_commit.
GitHub commit

commit d52fe4740eb1 (pgadmin-org/pgadmin4)

Fix landed in pgadmin-org/pgadmin4 commit d52fe4740eb1 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/commit/d52fe4740eb1af89d940f2e412bd66a0a89f08bb
Web page

Internal tracking: pending fix for 9.19 · Issue #10662 · pgadmin-org/pgadmin4 · GitHub

https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/10662

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-116242(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 4× in last 7d / 4× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-30 21:02 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-114383 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  2. 2026-10-30 20:26 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-30 20:05 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 8.2 HIGH
  4. 2026-10-30 20:03 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-116242?
CVE-2026-116242 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 30, 2026. pgAdmin 4 opens SSH tunnels with the sshtunnel library but gave it neither hostpkeydirectories nor sshconfigfile, so it always loaded the unencrypted private keys in ~/.ssh of the operating-system account running pgAdmin, read that account's ~/.ssh/config (IdentityFile, User, HostName,…
When was CVE-2026-116242 made public?
CVE-2026-116242 was made public on October 29, 2026: that is the date its CVE record's CNA, PostgreSQL, gives for when the vulnerability was made public. The CVE record itself was published on October 30, 2026. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 30, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-116242?
CVE-2026-116242 has a CVSS base score of 8.2 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-116242?
An upstream fix for CVE-2026-116242 has been merged but is not yet in a tagged release. Until it ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation, then update to the release that contains the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-116242 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-116242

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-116242?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.