pgAgent: Use of Insufficiently Random Values
CVE-2025-0218 is a high-severity use of insufficiently random values vulnerability in pgAgent, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 4.2.3 as the first without the flaw, so updating pgAgent to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.18% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update pgAgent to 4.2.3 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 5.5 | Medium | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.1 | High | NVD |
Official description
When batch jobs are executed by pgAgent, a script is created in a temporary directory and then executed. In versions of pgAgent prior to 4.2.3, an insufficiently seeded random number generator is used when generating the directory name, leading to the possibility for a local attacker to pre-create the directory and thus prevent pgAgent from executing jobs, disrupting scheduled tasks.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Use of Insufficiently Random Values
The product uses insufficiently random numbers or values in a security context that depends on unpredictable numbers.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and select well-tested implementations with adequate length seeds. In general, if a pseudo-random number generator is not advertised as being cryptographically secure, then it is probably a statistical PRNG and should not be used in security-sensitive contexts. Pseudo-random number generators can produce predictable numbers if the generator is known and the seed can be guessed. A 256-bit seed is a good starting point for producing a random enough number.
- Consider a PRNG that re-seeds itself as needed from high quality pseudo-random output sources, such as hardware devices.
- Use products or modules that conform to FIPS 140-2 to avoid obvious entropy problems. Consult FIPS 140-2 Annex C (Approved Random Number Generators).
More Use of Insufficiently Random Values vulnerabilities (CWE-330)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other references
Recent Use of Insufficiently Random Values vulnerabilities
- 8.1 High severity
- 8.0 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.