piccolo SQL Injection via named transaction savepoints

Exploitation

No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.

CVSS 4.0

9.3 · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N · score source

EPSS

• CVE-2023-47128: 0.78% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 56.05 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

Summary The handling of named transaction savepoints in all database implementations is vulnerable to SQL Injection as user provided input is passed directly to connection.execute(...) via f-strings. Details An excerpt of the Postgres savepoint handling: In this example, we can see user input is directly passed to connection.execute without being properly escaped. All implementations of savepoints and savepoint methods directly pass this name parameter to connection.execute and are vulnerable to this. A non-exhaustive list can be found below: - Postgres - - One - - Two - - Three - Sqlite - - One - - Two - - Three Care should be given to ensuring all strings passed to connection.execute are properly escaped, regardless of how end user facing they may be. Further to this, the following method also passes user input directly to an execution context however I have been unable to abuse this functionality at the time of writing. This method also has a far lower chance of being exposed to…

Published by the source

12 Nov 2023, 15:57 UTC

Last modified by the source

9 Jun 2026, 13:04 UTC

Source last checked

26 Oct 2026, 13:21 UTC

1. Revision 3 · amended · 26 Oct 2026

   Amended from ghsa record GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6

2. Revision 2 · amended · 25 Oct 2026

   Reviewed OSV alias/range/CVSS4 correction; package source scopes and original publication preserved. No customer finding resolved.

3. Revision 1 · created · 24 Oct 2026

   Published from osv record GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2023-47128

Advisory: piccolo SQL Injection via named transaction savepoints
IDs: CVE-2023-47128, GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2023-47128 (revision 3, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 13:21 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: Critical (CVSS 9.3)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: piccolo 1.1.1. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- PyPI piccolo: affected < 1.1.1; fixed in 1.1.1

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- `python -m pip show piccolo`: prints the installed version. Run with the environment that serves production active.

## Supported action
Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on piccolo.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6 (OSV record GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6 lists affected ranges: PyPI piccolo >=0 <1.1.1 (fixed))
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-xq59-7jf3-rjc6 lists affected ranges: PyPI piccolo >=0 <1.1.1)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.