Skip to content

GHSA-qmgc-5h2g-mvrw CVE-2026-22701 PYSEC-2026-1374

filelock Time-of-Check-Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Symlink Vulnerability in SoftFileLock

Medium PyPI
Severity
5.3 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.13%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 2.31% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
CWE-367 Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
CWE-59 Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following')
Fix
3.20.3
Upgrade filelock to this version or later

Description

Vulnerability Summary

Title: Time-of-Check-Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Symlink Vulnerability in SoftFileLock

Affected Component: filelock package - SoftFileLock class File: src/filelock/_soft.py lines 17-27 CWE: CWE-362, CWE-367, CWE-59


Description

A TOCTOU race condition vulnerability exists in the SoftFileLock implementation of the filelock package. An attacker with local filesystem access and permission to create symlinks can exploit a race condition between the permission validation and file creation to cause lock operations to fail or behave unexpectedly.

The vulnerability occurs in the _acquire() method between raise_on_not_writable_file() (permission check) and os.open() (file creation). During this race window, an attacker can create a symlink at the lock file path, potentially causing the lock to operate on an unintended target file or leading to denial of service.

Attack Scenario

1. Lock attempts to acquire on /tmp/app.lock
2. Permission validation passes
3. [RACE WINDOW] - Attacker creates: ln -s /tmp/important.txt /tmp/app.lock
4. os.open() tries to create lock file
5. Lock operates on attacker-controlled target file or fails

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?

This is a Time-of-Check-Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) race condition vulnerability affecting any application using SoftFileLock for inter-process synchronization.

Affected Users:

  • Applications using filelock.SoftFileLock directly
  • Applications using the fallback FileLock on systems without fcntl support (e.g., GraalPy)

Consequences:

  • Silent lock acquisition failure - applications may not detect that exclusive resource access is not guaranteed
  • Denial of Service - attacker can prevent lock file creation by maintaining symlink
  • Resource serialization failures - multiple processes may acquire "locks" simultaneously
  • Unintended file operations - lock could operate on attacker-controlled files

CVSS v4.0 Score: 5.6 (Medium) Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AT:L/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Requirements:

  • Local filesystem access to the directory containing lock files
  • Permission to create symlinks (standard for regular unprivileged users on Unix/Linux)
  • Ability to time the symlink creation during the narrow race window

Patches

Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?

Yes, the vulnerability has been patched by adding the O_NOFOLLOW flag to prevent symlink following during lock file creation.

Patched Version: Next release (commit: 255ed068bc85d1ef406e50a135e1459170dd1bf0)

Mitigation Details:

  • The O_NOFOLLOW flag is added conditionally and gracefully degrades on platforms without support
  • On platforms with O_NOFOLLOW support (most modern systems): symlink attacks are completely prevented
  • On platforms without O_NOFOLLOW (e.g., GraalPy): TOCTOU window remains but is documented

Users should:

  • Upgrade to the patched version when available
  • For critical deployments, consider using UnixFileLock or WindowsFileLock instead of the fallback SoftFileLock

Workarounds

Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?

For users unable to update immediately:

  1. Avoid SoftFileLock in security-sensitive contexts - use UnixFileLock or WindowsFileLock when available (these were already patched for CVE-2025-68146)

  2. Restrict filesystem permissions - prevent untrusted users from creating symlinks in lock file directories:

    chmod 700 /path/to/lock/directory
    
  3. Use process isolation - isolate untrusted code from lock file paths to prevent symlink creation

  4. Monitor lock operations - implement application-level checks to verify lock acquisitions are successful before proceeding with critical operations


References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?


Reported by: George Tsigourakos (@tsigouris007)

Affected versions

PyPI

PackageVulnerableFixed in
filelock
< 3.20.3
3.20.3

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.

filelock PyPI → 3.20.3

pip
pip install --upgrade "filelock>=3.20.3"
poetry
poetry add "filelock>=3.20.3"
uv
uv add "filelock>=3.20.3"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 5.3

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

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

Weakness

CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
  • Architecture and Design: Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
  • Architecture and Design: Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).
  • Implementation: When using multithreading and operating on shared variables, only use thread-safe functions.
  • Implementation: Use atomic operations on shared variables. Be wary of innocent-looking constructs such as "x++". This may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read, followed by a computation, followed by a write.
  • Implementation: Use a mutex if available, but be sure to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-412.
  • Implementation: Avoid double-checked locking (CWE-609) and other implementation errors that arise when trying to avoid the overhead of synchronization.
  • Implementation: Disable interrupts or signals over critical parts of the code, but also make sure that the code does not go into a large or infinite loop.
  • Implementation: Use the volatile type modifier for critical variables to avoid unexpected compiler optimization or reordering. This does not necessarily solve the synchronization problem, but it can help.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.

CWE-367: Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition

The product checks the state of a resource before using that resource, but the resource's state can change between the check and the use in a way that invalidates the results of the check.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: The most basic advice for TOCTOU vulnerabilities is to not perform a check before the use. This does not resolve the underlying issue of the execution of a function on a resource whose state and identity cannot be assured, but it does help to limit the false sense of security given by the check.
  • Implementation: When the file being altered is owned by the current user and group, set the effective gid and uid to that of the current user and group when executing this statement.
  • Architecture and Design: Limit the interleaving of operations on files from multiple processes.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: If you cannot perform operations atomically and you must share access to the resource between multiple processes or threads, then try to limit the amount of time (CPU cycles) between the check and use of the resource. This will not fix the problem, but it could make it more difficult for an attack to succeed.
  • Implementation: Recheck the resource after the use call to verify that the action was taken appropriately.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that some environmental locking mechanism can be used to protect resources effectively.
  • Implementation: Ensure that locking occurs before the check, as opposed to afterwards, such that the resource, as checked, is the same as it is when in use.

CWE-59: Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following')

The product attempts to access a file based on the filename, but it does not properly prevent that filename from identifying a link or shortcut that resolves to an unintended resource.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system. Denying access to a file can prevent an attacker from replacing that file with a link to a sensitive file. Ensure good compartmentalization in the system to provide protected areas that can be trusted.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-wfhq-q4j2-c37m
filelock: SoftReadWriteLock follows a lock tree swapped in after its first acquire and writes lock records into directories of the user running the lock
Low Also affects filelock
GHSA-6627-m3xw-93mp
filelock: StrictSoftFileLock creates its claim directories without the lock mode, so another local user with a write bit on them can end a live hold
Medium Also affects filelock
GHSA-9c4x-gm8v-wgc4
filelock: StrictSoftFileLock and SoftReadWriteLock adopt a protocol directory another user created first, losing mutual exclusion
Medium Also affects filelock
GHSA-8mx5-7m5m-r77g
filelock: WindowsFileLock ignores mode: a 0o600 lock file and the ReadWriteLock database inherit the directory ACL
Medium Also affects filelock
GHSA-cwqr-hh33-gh44
filelock ReadWriteLock: a crafted lock database makes every acquire stall or hang regardless of timeout
Medium Also affects filelock
GHSA-rfpc-qcw5-3pc4
filelock: SoftFileLock removes a live holder's marker when another user forges the PID in a writable marker
Medium Also affects filelock
GHSA-9j6q-wvj5-jgjg
filelock: Symlink swap during SoftFileLock's writability check leaks whether a path exists and is writable by the lock taker
Low Also affects filelock
GHSA-69hj-f68j-2879
filelock: UnixFileLock truncates and chmods any regular file another user renames or hard-links onto the lock path
Medium Also affects filelock
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