CWE-693
DiscouragedProtection Mechanism Failure
Abstraction: Pillar · Status: Draft
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
1263 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-M83H-48RR-JCRH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-28 09:30 – Updated: 2026-02-12 21:31SolarWinds Web Help Desk was found to be susceptible to a security control bypass vulnerability that if exploited, could allow an unauthenticated attacker to gain access to certain restricted functionality.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-40536"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-28T08:16:01Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "SolarWinds Web Help Desk was found to be susceptible to a security control bypass vulnerability that if exploited, could allow an unauthenticated attacker to gain access to certain restricted functionality.",
"id": "GHSA-m83h-48rr-jcrh",
"modified": "2026-02-12T21:31:24Z",
"published": "2026-01-28T09:30:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-40536"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://documentation.solarwinds.com/en/success_center/whd/content/release_notes/whd_2026-1_release_notes.htm"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2025-40536"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.huntress.com/blog/active-exploitation-solarwinds-web-help-desk-cve-2025-26399"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.solarwinds.com/trust-center/security-advisories/CVE-2025-40536"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-M8XP-VJQ7-78WM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-20 21:31 – Updated: 2026-05-20 21:31Insufficient policy enforcement in ServiceWorker in Google Chrome on prior to 148.0.7778.179 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-9116"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-20T20:16:42Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in ServiceWorker in Google Chrome on prior to 148.0.7778.179 allowed a remote attacker to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)",
"id": "GHSA-m8xp-vjq7-78wm",
"modified": "2026-05-20T21:31:32Z",
"published": "2026-05-20T21:31:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-9116"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0841193308.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/497436273"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-M948-R7JW-VPW6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:15 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:15The Head Unit HU_NBT (aka Infotainment) component on BMW i Series, BMW X Series, BMW 3 Series, BMW 5 Series, and BMW 7 Series vehicles produced in 2012 through 2018 allows an attack by an attacker who has direct physical access.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-9314"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-05-31T12:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Head Unit HU_NBT (aka Infotainment) component on BMW i Series, BMW X Series, BMW 3 Series, BMW 5 Series, and BMW 7 Series vehicles produced in 2012 through 2018 allows an attack by an attacker who has direct physical access.",
"id": "GHSA-m948-r7jw-vpw6",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:15:32Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:15:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-9314"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://keenlab.tencent.com/en/Experimental_Security_Assessment_of_BMW_Cars_by_KeenLab.pdf"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/23/bmw_security_bugs"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104258"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MCG2-6F5J-3FMV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-29 18:30 – Updated: 2024-10-29 18:30Protection mechanism failure in some Intel(R) OFU software before version 14.1.31 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-25945"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-14T14:15:43Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Protection mechanism failure in some Intel(R) OFU software before version 14.1.31 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.",
"id": "GHSA-mcg2-6f5j-3fmv",
"modified": "2024-10-29T18:30:33Z",
"published": "2024-10-29T18:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-25945"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00927.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MFCW-83QG-4VW3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-10-19 19:00 – Updated: 2022-12-16 19:50Compuware Xpediter Code Coverage Plugin 1.0.7 and earlier implements an agent/controller message that does not limit where it can be executed.
It allows attackers able to control agent processes to obtain the values of Java system properties from the Jenkins controller process.
This vulnerability is only exploitable in Jenkins 2.318 and earlier, LTS 2.303.2 and earlier. See the LTS upgrade guide.
Compuware Xpediter Code Coverage Plugin 1.0.8 restricts execution of the agent/controller message to agents.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.compuware.jenkins:compuware-xpediter-code-coverage"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.0.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-43424"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-10-19T22:20:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2022-10-19T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Compuware Xpediter Code Coverage Plugin 1.0.7 and earlier implements an agent/controller message that does not limit where it can be executed.\n\nIt allows attackers able to control agent processes to obtain the values of Java system properties from the Jenkins controller process.\n\nThis vulnerability is only exploitable in Jenkins 2.318 and earlier, LTS 2.303.2 and earlier. See the [LTS upgrade guide](https://www.jenkins.io/doc/upgrade-guide/2.303/#upgrading-to-jenkins-lts-2-303-3).\n\nCompuware Xpediter Code Coverage Plugin 1.0.8 restricts execution of the agent/controller message to agents.",
"id": "GHSA-mfcw-83qg-4vw3",
"modified": "2022-12-16T19:50:04Z",
"published": "2022-10-19T19:00:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-43424"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/compuware-xpediter-code-coverage-plugin/commit/e506fc9e77a2609f6a5aa331e052d35be652071c"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/compuware-xpediter-code-coverage-plugin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2022-10-19/#SECURITY-2627"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2022/10/19/3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Agent-to-controller security bypass vulnerability in Jenkins Compuware Xpediter Code Coverage Plugin"
}
GHSA-MGC2-25XQ-J88C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-02 00:31 – Updated: 2026-07-02 03:31Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.46 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14409"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-01T23:16:49Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Inappropriate implementation in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.46 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)",
"id": "GHSA-mgc2-25xq-j88c",
"modified": "2026-07-02T03:31:26Z",
"published": "2026-07-02T00:31:41Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14409"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_0175352312.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/513810921"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MGQF-QH5M-W5XX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-14 21:30 – Updated: 2026-05-15 00:30Insufficient policy enforcement in GPU in Google Chrome on Android prior to 148.0.7778.168 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-8571"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-14T20:17:19Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Insufficient policy enforcement in GPU in Google Chrome on Android prior to 148.0.7778.168 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)",
"id": "GHSA-mgqf-qh5m-w5xx",
"modified": "2026-05-15T00:30:30Z",
"published": "2026-05-14T21:30:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-8571"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/05/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_12.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.chromium.org/issues/491422244"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MGX3-9W7V-8674
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-04 15:30 – Updated: 2026-07-10 15:31In Trail of Bits fickling versions up to and including 0.1.11, the UnsafeImportsML analysis pass unconditionally calls AnalysisContext.shorten_code(node) on every import node it inspects, regardless of whether the import is flagged as unsafe. This call registers the shortened code representation in the shared AnalysisContext.reported_shortened_code set. When the MLAllowlist analysis pass subsequently runs, it calls the same shorten_code() method, receives already_reported=True for every import, and executes a continue statement that skips its allowlist check entirely. This renders MLAllowlist dead code for all imports — it never evaluates whether an import is in the ML allowlist or not. The MLAllowlist pass was designed to catch imports of modules outside the known-safe ML ecosystem (torch, numpy, transformers, etc.) that slip past the UnsafeImports denylist. With MLAllowlist inoperative, any standard library module not in the UNSAFE_IMPORTS denylist can be invoked via pickle deserialization while fickling's check_safety() returns LIKELY_SAFE. The fickling.load() API chains check_safety() into pickle.loads() as an explicit security gate, meaning a LIKELY_SAFE verdict causes the payload to be deserialized and executed. The root cause is shared mutable state between independently-correct analysis passes — UnsafeImportsML works as designed in isolation, MLAllowlist works as designed in isolation, but the shared reported_shortened_code set causes UnsafeImportsML to poison MLAllowlist's deduplication logic.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14535"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-04T14:16:29Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In Trail of Bits fickling versions up to and including 0.1.11, the UnsafeImportsML analysis pass unconditionally calls AnalysisContext.shorten_code(node) on every import node it inspects, regardless of whether the import is flagged as unsafe. This call registers the shortened code representation in the shared AnalysisContext.reported_shortened_code set. When the MLAllowlist analysis pass subsequently runs, it calls the same shorten_code() method, receives already_reported=True for every import, and executes a continue statement that skips its allowlist check entirely. This renders MLAllowlist dead code for all imports \u2014 it never evaluates whether an import is in the ML allowlist or not. The MLAllowlist pass was designed to catch imports of modules outside the known-safe ML ecosystem (torch, numpy, transformers, etc.) that slip past the UnsafeImports denylist. With MLAllowlist inoperative, any standard library module not in the UNSAFE_IMPORTS denylist can be invoked via pickle deserialization while fickling\u0027s check_safety() returns LIKELY_SAFE. The fickling.load() API chains check_safety() into pickle.loads() as an explicit security gate, meaning a LIKELY_SAFE verdict causes the payload to be deserialized and executed. The root cause is shared mutable state between independently-correct analysis passes \u2014 UnsafeImportsML works as designed in isolation, MLAllowlist works as designed in isolation, but the shared reported_shortened_code set causes UnsafeImportsML to poison MLAllowlist\u0027s deduplication logic.",
"id": "GHSA-mgx3-9w7v-8674",
"modified": "2026-07-10T15:31:35Z",
"published": "2026-07-04T15:30:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/security/advisories/GHSA-cffv-grgg-g429"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14535"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/pull/278"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/commit/41ce7cb01edd97072994039574a2301ebb3f463d"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/releases/tag/v0.1.12"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MH46-WJ9J-83VR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-07-09 18:30 – Updated: 2024-07-09 18:30Windows LockDown Policy (WLDP) Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-38070"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-07-09T17:15:40Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Windows LockDown Policy (WLDP) Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability",
"id": "GHSA-mh46-wj9j-83vr",
"modified": "2024-07-09T18:30:52Z",
"published": "2024-07-09T18:30:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38070"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2024-38070"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-MJQP-26HC-GRXG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-10 19:50 – Updated: 2026-06-06 14:43Summary
Picklescan's ability to scan ZIP archives for malicious pickle files is compromised when the archive contains a file with a bad Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC). Instead of attempting to scan the files within the archive, whatever the CRC is, Picklescan fails in error and returns no results. This allows attackers to potentially hide malicious pickle payloads within ZIP archives that PyTorch might still be able to load (as PyTorch often disables CRC checks).
Details
Picklescan likely utilizes Python's built-in zipfile module to handle ZIP archives. When zipfile encounters a file within an archive that has a mismatch between the declared CRC and the calculated CRC, it can raise an exception (e.g., BadZipFile or a related error). It appears that Picklescan does not try to scan the files whatever the CRC is. This behavior contrasts with PyTorch's model loading capabilities, which in many cases might bypass CRC checks for ZIP archives - whatever the configuration is. This discrepancy creates a blind spot where a malicious model packaged in a ZIP with a bad CRC could be loaded by PyTorch while being completely missed by Picklescan.
PoC
- Download an existing Pytorch model with a bad CRC
wget <https://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/resolve/main/pytorch_model.bin?download=true> -O pytorch_model.bin
- Attempt to scan the corrupted ZIP file with PickleScan:
# Assuming you have Picklescan installed and in your PATH
picklescan -p pytorch_model.bin
Observed Result: Picklescan returns no results and presents an error message indicating a problem with the ZIP file, but it doesn’t attempt to scan any potentially valid pickle files within the archive.
Expected Result: Picklescan should either:
- Attempt to extract and scan other valid files within the ZIP archive, even if some have CRC errors.
- Report a warning indicating that the ZIP archive has CRC errors and might be incomplete or corrupted, but still attempt to scan any accessible content.
Impact
Severity: High
Affected Users: Any organization or individual using Picklescan to analyze PyTorch models or other files distributed as ZIP archives for malicious pickle content.
Impact Details: Attackers can craft malicious PyTorch models containing embedded pickle payloads, package them into ZIP archives, and intentionally introduce CRC errors. This would cause Picklescan to fail to analyze the archive, while PyTorch is still able to load the model (depending on its configuration regarding CRC checks). This creates a significant vulnerability where malicious code can be distributed and potentially executed without detection by Picklescan.
Ex: Picklescan on HuggingFace goes into error (https://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/tree/main)
Recommendations: Picklescan should not fail on Bad CRC check, especially if Pytorch is not checking CRC. Relaxed Zipfile is perfect to fix this issue:
--- picklescan/src/picklescan/relaxed_zipfile.py
+++ picklescan/src/picklescan/relaxed_zipfile.py
@@ class RelaxedZipFile(zipfile.ZipFile):
try:
# Skip the file header:
fheader = zef_file.read(sizeFileHeader)
if len(fheader) != sizeFileHeader:
raise zipfile.BadZipFile("Truncated file header")
fheader = struct.unpack(structFileHeader, fheader)
if fheader[_FH_SIGNATURE] != stringFileHeader:
raise zipfile.BadZipFile("Bad magic number for file header")
zef_file.read(fheader[_FH_FILENAME_LENGTH])
if fheader[_FH_EXTRA_FIELD_LENGTH]:
zef_file.read(fheader[_FH_EXTRA_FIELD_LENGTH])
- return zipfile.ZipExtFile(zef_file, mode, zinfo, pwd, True)
+
+ # Create the ZipExtFile and disable CRC check
+ ext_file = zipfile.ZipExtFile(zef_file, mode, zinfo, pwd)
+ # Monkey-patch to skip CRC validation
+ ext_file._expected_crc = None
+ return ext_file
except BaseException:
zef_file.close()
raise
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.0.30"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "picklescan"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.31"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-10156"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-693",
"CWE-755"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-09-10T19:50:46Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Summary\nPicklescan\u0027s ability to scan ZIP archives for malicious pickle files is compromised when the archive contains a file with a bad Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC). Instead of attempting to scan the files within the archive, whatever the CRC is, Picklescan fails in error and returns no results. This allows attackers to potentially hide malicious pickle payloads within ZIP archives that PyTorch might still be able to load (as PyTorch often disables CRC checks).\n\n\n### Details\nPicklescan likely utilizes Python\u0027s built-in zipfile module to handle ZIP archives. When zipfile encounters a file within an archive that has a mismatch between the declared CRC and the calculated CRC, it can raise an exception (e.g., BadZipFile or a related error). It appears that Picklescan does not try to scan the files whatever the CRC is.\nThis behavior contrasts with PyTorch\u0027s model loading capabilities, which in many cases might bypass CRC checks for ZIP archives - whatever the configuration is. This discrepancy creates a blind spot where a malicious model packaged in a ZIP with a bad CRC could be loaded by PyTorch while being completely missed by Picklescan.\n\n### PoC\n\n1. Download an existing Pytorch model with a bad CRC\n\n`wget \u003chttps://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/resolve/main/pytorch_model.bin?download=true\u003e -O pytorch_model.bin`\n\n2. Attempt to scan the corrupted ZIP file with PickleScan:\n\n```\n# Assuming you have Picklescan installed and in your PATH\npicklescan -p pytorch_model.bin\n```\n\n\n**Observed Result**: Picklescan returns no results and presents an error message indicating a problem with the ZIP file, but it doesn\u2019t attempt to scan any potentially valid pickle files within the archive.\n\n**Expected Result:** Picklescan should either:\n\n- Attempt to extract and scan other valid files within the ZIP archive, even if some have CRC errors.\n- Report a warning indicating that the ZIP archive has CRC errors and might be incomplete or corrupted, but still attempt to scan any accessible content.\n\n### Impact\n**Severity**: High \n**Affected Users**: Any organization or individual using Picklescan to analyze PyTorch models or other files distributed as ZIP archives for malicious pickle content.\n**Impact Details**: Attackers can craft malicious PyTorch models containing embedded pickle payloads, package them into ZIP archives, and intentionally introduce CRC errors. This would cause Picklescan to fail to analyze the archive, while PyTorch is still able to load the model (depending on its configuration regarding CRC checks). This creates a significant vulnerability where malicious code can be distributed and potentially executed without detection by Picklescan.\n**Ex: Picklescan on HuggingFace goes into error** (https://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/tree/main)\n\n\n**Recommendations:**\nPicklescan should not fail on Bad CRC check, especially if Pytorch is not checking CRC.\nRelaxed Zipfile is perfect to fix this issue:\n```\n--- picklescan/src/picklescan/relaxed_zipfile.py\n+++ picklescan/src/picklescan/relaxed_zipfile.py\n@@ class RelaxedZipFile(zipfile.ZipFile):\n try:\n # Skip the file header:\n fheader = zef_file.read(sizeFileHeader)\n if len(fheader) != sizeFileHeader:\n raise zipfile.BadZipFile(\"Truncated file header\")\n\n fheader = struct.unpack(structFileHeader, fheader)\n if fheader[_FH_SIGNATURE] != stringFileHeader:\n raise zipfile.BadZipFile(\"Bad magic number for file header\")\n\n zef_file.read(fheader[_FH_FILENAME_LENGTH])\n if fheader[_FH_EXTRA_FIELD_LENGTH]:\n zef_file.read(fheader[_FH_EXTRA_FIELD_LENGTH])\n\n- return zipfile.ZipExtFile(zef_file, mode, zinfo, pwd, True)\n+\n+ # Create the ZipExtFile and disable CRC check\n+ ext_file = zipfile.ZipExtFile(zef_file, mode, zinfo, pwd)\n+ # Monkey-patch to skip CRC validation\n+ ext_file._expected_crc = None\n+ return ext_file\n\n except BaseException:\n zef_file.close()\n raise\n```",
"id": "GHSA-mjqp-26hc-grxg",
"modified": "2026-06-06T14:43:36Z",
"published": "2025-09-10T19:50:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/security/advisories/GHSA-mjqp-26hc-grxg"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-10156"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/commit/28a7b4ef753466572bda3313737116eeb9b4e5c5"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mmaitre314/picklescan/blob/v0.0.29/src/picklescan/relaxed_zipfile.py#L35"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/picklescan/PYSEC-2025-152.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/resolve/main/pytorch_model.bin?download=true"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huggingface.co/jinaai/jina-embeddings-v2-base-en/tree/main"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Picklescan: ZIP archive scan bypass is possible through non-exhaustive Cyclic Redundancy Check"
}
No mitigation information available for this CWE.
CAPEC-1: Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs
In applications, particularly web applications, access to functionality is mitigated by an authorization framework. This framework maps Access Control Lists (ACLs) to elements of the application's functionality; particularly URL's for web apps. In the case that the administrator failed to specify an ACL for a particular element, an attacker may be able to access it with impunity. An attacker with the ability to access functionality not properly constrained by ACLs can obtain sensitive information and possibly compromise the entire application. Such an attacker can access resources that must be available only to users at a higher privilege level, can access management sections of the application, or can run queries for data that they otherwise not supposed to.
CAPEC-107: Cross Site Tracing
Cross Site Tracing (XST) enables an adversary to steal the victim's session cookie and possibly other authentication credentials transmitted in the header of the HTTP request when the victim's browser communicates to a destination system's web server.
CAPEC-127: Directory Indexing
An adversary crafts a request to a target that results in the target listing/indexing the content of a directory as output. One common method of triggering directory contents as output is to construct a request containing a path that terminates in a directory name rather than a file name since many applications are configured to provide a list of the directory's contents when such a request is received. An adversary can use this to explore the directory tree on a target as well as learn the names of files. This can often end up revealing test files, backup files, temporary files, hidden files, configuration files, user accounts, script contents, as well as naming conventions, all of which can be used by an attacker to mount additional attacks.
CAPEC-17: Using Malicious Files
An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an adversary to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an adversary to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
CAPEC-20: Encryption Brute Forcing
An attacker, armed with the cipher text and the encryption algorithm used, performs an exhaustive (brute force) search on the key space to determine the key that decrypts the cipher text to obtain the plaintext.
CAPEC-22: Exploiting Trust in Client
An attack of this type exploits vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by communicating directly with the server where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
CAPEC-237: Escaping a Sandbox by Calling Code in Another Language
The attacker may submit malicious code of another language to obtain access to privileges that were not intentionally exposed by the sandbox, thus escaping the sandbox. For instance, Java code cannot perform unsafe operations, such as modifying arbitrary memory locations, due to restrictions placed on it by the Byte code Verifier and the JVM. If allowed, Java code can call directly into native C code, which may perform unsafe operations, such as call system calls and modify arbitrary memory locations on their behalf. To provide isolation, Java does not grant untrusted code with unmediated access to native C code. Instead, the sandboxed code is typically allowed to call some subset of the pre-existing native code that is part of standard libraries.
CAPEC-36: Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality
An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for.
CAPEC-477: Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content
An attacker exploits the underlying complexity of a data structure that allows for both signed and unsigned content, to cause unsigned data to be processed as though it were signed data.
CAPEC-480: Escaping Virtualization
An adversary gains access to an application, service, or device with the privileges of an authorized or privileged user by escaping the confines of a virtualized environment. The adversary is then able to access resources or execute unauthorized code within the host environment, generally with the privileges of the user running the virtualized process. Successfully executing an attack of this type is often the first step in executing more complex attacks.
CAPEC-51: Poison Web Service Registry
SOA and Web Services often use a registry to perform look up, get schema information, and metadata about services. A poisoned registry can redirect (think phishing for servers) the service requester to a malicious service provider, provide incorrect information in schema or metadata, and delete information about service provider interfaces.
CAPEC-57: Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data
This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to obtain sensitive data once SSL is terminated.
CAPEC-59: Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
CAPEC-65: Sniff Application Code
An adversary passively sniffs network communications and captures application code bound for an authorized client. Once obtained, they can use it as-is, or through reverse-engineering glean sensitive information or exploit the trust relationship between the client and server. Such code may belong to a dynamic update to the client, a patch being applied to a client component or any such interaction where the client is authorized to communicate with the server.
CAPEC-668: Key Negotiation of Bluetooth Attack (KNOB)
An adversary can exploit a flaw in Bluetooth key negotiation allowing them to decrypt information sent between two devices communicating via Bluetooth. The adversary uses an Adversary in the Middle setup to modify packets sent between the two devices during the authentication process, specifically the entropy bits. Knowledge of the number of entropy bits will allow the attacker to easily decrypt information passing over the line of communication.
CAPEC-74: Manipulating State
The adversary modifies state information maintained by the target software or causes a state transition in hardware. If successful, the target will use this tainted state and execute in an unintended manner.
State management is an important function within a software application. User state maintained by the application can include usernames, payment information, browsing history as well as application-specific contents such as items in a shopping cart. Manipulating user state can be employed by an adversary to elevate privilege, conduct fraudulent transactions or otherwise modify the flow of the application to derive certain benefits.
If there is a hardware logic error in a finite state machine, the adversary can use this to put the system in an undefined state which could cause a denial of service or exposure of secure data.
CAPEC-87: Forceful Browsing
An attacker employs forceful browsing (direct URL entry) to access portions of a website that are otherwise unreachable. Usually, a front controller or similar design pattern is employed to protect access to portions of a web application. Forceful browsing enables an attacker to access information, perform privileged operations and otherwise reach sections of the web application that have been improperly protected.