CVE 7.5 HIGH

ProxySQL MCP run_sql_readonly executes side-effecting MySQL multi-statements despite read-only contract_CVE-2026-48774

7.5 / 10
HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Description

ProxySQL is a proxy for MySQL and its forks, as well as PostgreSQL. In versions 3.0.0 through 3.0.8, ProxySQL's GenAI/MCP `run_sql_readonly` tool violates its documented read-only contract for MySQL targets. The tool validates only the full input string with a substring blacklist and first-keyword allowlist, but then executes the entire SQL string on a backend connection created with `CLIENT_MULTI_STATEMENTS`. As a result, a caller can submit a read-only first statement followed by a side-effecting second statement, such as `SELECT 1; RENAME TABLE ...`. The validator accepts the payload because it starts with `SELECT` and because side-effecting MySQL statements such as `RENAME TABLE`, `SET`, `RESET`, `LOCK TABLES`, and `KILL` are not rejected by the blacklist. In a live MCP runtime test, the `/mcp/query` endpoint accepted a `run_sql_readonly` request. The MCP response reported success for the first `SELECT`, and direct backend verification showed that the table had actually been renamed. This violates the endpoint's read-only security contract and lets an MCP caller perform backend writes or administrative SQL, limited by the configured MCP target account's database privileges. Version 3.0.9 contains a fix. Other operator mitigations include: keeping MCP disabled unless required; setting a non-empty `mcp-query_endpoint_auth` token before exposing `/mcp/query`; restricting MCP listener network exposure; configuring MCP backend target credentials as database-level read-only users; and adding temporary MCP query rules to block obvious multi-statement patterns.

Basic Information

ID CVE-2026-48774
Source GitHub_M
Published Jun 19, 2026 at 19:34

Affected Product

Vendor sysown
Product proxysql
Version >= 3.0.6, < 3.0.9
Affected Versions sysown proxysql >= 3.0.6, < 3.0.9

CWE Classification

References

💭 Join the Security Discussion

🔒 Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.