Skip to content

GHSA-6hwm-xvph-95vm CVE-2026-78680 PYSEC-2026-3868

NLTK: Uncontrolled search path when invoking the Graphviz 'dot' binary

High PyPI
Severity
0.0 / 10
High · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.18%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 7.23% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-426 Untrusted Search Path
CWE-427 Uncontrolled Search Path Element
Fix
3.10.3
Upgrade nltk to this version or later

Description

Two NLTK sites executed the Graphviz dot program by bare name, so process creation resolved it via the search path — and on Windows via the current working directory — rather than a validated absolute location. An attacker who can place a file named dot where resolution looks (the CWD on Windows, or a writable/relative entry such as . on PATH) has their binary executed in place of Graphviz (arbitrary code execution).

Affected (<= 3.10.2):

  • nltk.parse.dependencygraph.dot2img — called find_binary("dot") but discarded the returned validated path and then ran the bare name ["dot", ...], so the validation had no effect.
  • nltk.translate.api.AlignedSent._repr_svg_ — ran the bare name with no validation at all (IPython SVG rendering).

This is the same class already fixed for the senna, weka, boxer, malt, repp and hunpos wrappers. nltk.internals.find_binary refuses a CWD-relative match for a bare tool name and returns only a trusted absolute path; the fix runs that path in both sites.


Attack demonstration

Captured output, not illustrative. A ./dot that writes a PWNED marker, planted in the CWD with . prepended to PATH.

The vulnerable behaviour (old bare-name exec):

Control (OLD behavior) — bare ['dot'] in this dir with '.' on PATH:
  bare ['dot'] executed planted binary = True

The patched functions refuse it:

FIXED code, with ./dot planted and '.' on PATH:
  dependencygraph.dot2img : Exception "Cannot find the dot binary..."  | planted-binary-executed=False  safe
  AlignedSent._repr_svg_  : Exception "Cannot find the dot binary..."  | planted-binary-executed=False  safe

And find_binary itself was attacked directly (the fix trusts nothing else):

Attack 1: ./dot in CWD, no dot on PATH            -> LookupError (refused)  safe
Attack 2: ./dot/dot (dir 'dot' holding 'dot')     -> LookupError (refused)  safe
Attack 3: '.' on PATH + ./dot                     -> LookupError (refused)  safe
Attack 4: attacker-writable ABSOLUTE dir on PATH  -> returned /…/evilbin/dot (absolute)

Attack 4 is out of scope: trusting an absolute directory that is already on PATH is the operating system's own trust model — an attacker who can write to a PATH directory owns the account regardless of NLTK. find_binary defends specifically against the CWD/relative injection that bare-name exec is vulnerable to (attacks 1–3), which is exactly what this fix inherits.

Environment: python 3.13.7. dot is not required to reproduce — the planted binary is the payload.

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
nltk
< 3.10.3
3.10.3

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

nltk PyPI → 3.10.3

pip
pip install --upgrade "nltk>=3.10.3"
poetry
poetry add "nltk>=3.10.3"
uv
uv add "nltk>=3.10.3"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

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

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 7.8

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

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-426: Untrusted Search Path

The product searches for critical resources using an externally-supplied search path that can point to resources that are not under the product's direct control.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Hard-code the search path to a set of known-safe values (such as system directories), or only allow them to be specified by the administrator in a configuration file. Do not allow these settings to be modified by an external party. Be careful to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-426 and CWE-428.
  • Implementation: When invoking other programs, specify those programs using fully-qualified pathnames. While this is an effective approach, code that uses fully-qualified pathnames might not be portable to other systems that do not use the same pathnames. The portability can be improved by locating the full-qualified paths in a centralized, easily-modifiable location within the source code, and having the code refer to these paths.
  • Implementation: Remove or restrict all environment settings before invoking other programs. This includes the PATH environment variable, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and other settings that identify the location of code libraries, and any application-specific search paths.
  • Implementation: Check your search path before use and remove any elements that are likely to be unsafe, such as the current working directory or a temporary files directory.
  • Implementation: Use other functions that require explicit paths. Making use of any of the other readily available functions that require explicit paths is a safe way to avoid this problem. For example, system() in C does not require a full path since the shell can take care of it, while execl() and execv() require a full path.

CWE-427: Uncontrolled Search Path Element

The product uses a fixed or controlled search path to find resources, but one or more locations in that path can be under the control of unintended actors.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Hard-code the search path to a set of known-safe values (such as system directories), or only allow them to be specified by the administrator in a configuration file. Do not allow these settings to be modified by an external party. Be careful to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-426 and CWE-428.
  • Implementation: When invoking other programs, specify those programs using fully-qualified pathnames. While this is an effective approach, code that uses fully-qualified pathnames might not be portable to other systems that do not use the same pathnames. The portability can be improved by locating the full-qualified paths in a centralized, easily-modifiable location within the source code, and having the code refer to these paths.
  • Implementation: Remove or restrict all environment settings before invoking other programs. This includes the PATH environment variable, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and other settings that identify the location of code libraries, and any application-specific search paths.
  • Implementation: Check your search path before use and remove any elements that are likely to be unsafe, such as the current working directory or a temporary files directory. Since this is a denylist approach, it might not be a complete solution.
  • Implementation: Use other functions that require explicit paths. Making use of any of the other readily available functions that require explicit paths is a safe way to avoid this problem. For example, system() in C does not require a full path since the shell can take care of finding the program using the PATH environment variable, while execl() and execv() require a full path.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-j456-xh4h-cpf2
NLTK: WekaClassifier passes an unvalidated caller-controlled model path to the weka JVM, bypassing nltk.pathsec containment
High Also affects nltk
GHSA-ff5c-cp5c-9wjf
NLTK: Uncontrolled resource consumption in RecursiveDescentParser via ambiguous or left-recursive grammars
Medium Also affects nltk
GHSA-f794-5jv7-7672
NLTK: Downloader.download follows hardlinks and overwrites outside-root files
High Also affects nltk
GHSA-8mgp-746c-j5xp
NLTK: Model-artifact APIs bypass pathsec and touch files outside allowed roots
High Also affects nltk
GHSA-8mpw-7fpc-4gqj
NLTK: Pl196xCorpusReader has quadratic ReDoS on malformed TEI blocks
Low Also affects nltk
GHSA-cw6x-m8jw-qmrh
NLTK: Uncontrolled recursion in nltk.featstruct.FeatStructReader causes unhandled RecursionError (DoS) via deeply nested feature-structure input
Medium Also affects nltk
GHSA-vp2x-qp44-57v7
NLTK: Quadratic CPU Exhaustion in `XMLCorpusView._read_xml_fragment()`
Low Also affects nltk
GHSA-ww6m-cw3f-q94g
NLTK: Quadratic-time DoS in PorterStemmer via long runs of 'y'
High Also affects nltk
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor