CVE-2026-96639

CVE-2026-96639 is a critical-severity out-of-bounds read vulnerability in Pillow (pip), affecting versions >= 11.0.0, < 13.0.0. It is fixed in 13.0.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Pillow multi-frame loaders can reuse stale native image storage after mode transitions

Pillow multi-frame image loaders can retain native ImagingCore storage allocated for one frame while changing the Python-side image mode and decoder tiles for a later frame.

If frame 0 allocates storage for a narrow mode such as L, and a later frame of the same dimensions switches to a wider mode such as RGB or CMYK, Pillow may decode wider pixels into the stale narrow native buffer. This causes native
out-of-bounds writes and process crashes. In the MPO/JPEG path, I also demonstrated command execution in matching Python/Pillow runtime profiles through Pillow's documented ImageSequence.Iterator + frame.load() path.

Details

The root cause appears to be that ImageFile.load_prepare() only reallocates native storage when _im is None. It does not verify that the retained native ImagingCore storage still matches self.mode and self.size.

Several multi-frame seek() / _open() paths can update self._mode and decoder tiles for a later frame without invalidating _im. The decoder then writes or reads according to the new frame mode while the native storage still belongs to the old frame mode.

Verified affected surfaces:

  1. PSD

    PsdImageFile.seek() can switch from grayscale/native L storage to RGB layer decoding while retaining _im. This produces attacker-controlled native out-of-bounds writes and reliable crashes.

  2. MPO/JPEG

    A crafted two-frame MPO can make frame 0 allocate L storage, then make frame 1 decode CMYK / RGB data into the retained L storage. The documented ImageSequence.Iterator path reaches this with frame.load().
    Verified native memory corruption, crash, over-read behavior, and scoped harmless-marker command execution on Pillow 12.3.0.

  3. DCX

    DcxImageFile.seek() calls PcxImageFile._open(), which changes mode/tile state without a native-storage mode guard. A crafted DCX with L then RGB PCX frames produces retained-storage mismatch and crash.

  4. MIC

    MIC can call TiffImageFile._open() directly and bypass TIFF's normal guarded seek() behavior. With a NextIFD-based reachable frame transition, this produces retained-storage mismatch and crash.

TIFF appears to be a useful positive control because its seek() path checks
both size and mode before reusing storage.

Reproduction Evidence

Tested version:

Pillow 12.3.0

MPO terminal proof environments:

Python 3.12.3 + Pillow 12.3.0, clean PyPI environment:
marker 10/10, control 0/10

Python 3.13.14 + Pillow 12.3.0, prepared profile:
marker 10/10, control 0/10

Server-side web-upload proof:

control 1..10: MARKER_MISSING
control_summary ok 0 missing 10 /10

vulnerable 1..10: MARKER_OK marker_output <server-user>
vulnerable_summary ok 10 missing 0 /10

The terminal proof uses a fixed harmless marker command only. It does not use a reverse shell, persistence, data exfiltration, or arbitrary attacker-selected commands.

I can provide the following private artifacts to maintainers:

  • minimal crash fixtures for PSD, MPO, DCX, and MIC,
  • non-weaponized MPO marker PoC,
  • local vulnerable web upload demo,
  • gdb/GEF geometry receipts,
  • control-run logs,
  • proposed regression-test shape.

Minimal Reproduction Shape

For the MPO path, the vulnerable consumer shape is:

from io import BytesIO
from PIL import Image, ImageSequence

source = BytesIO(open(path, "rb").read())
image = Image.open(source)
iterator = ImageSequence.Iterator(image)
next(iterator).load()
next(iterator).load()

The crafted image shape is:

frame 0: mode L, dimensions W x H
frame 1: same W x H, wider mode such as CMYK

Frame 0 allocates native L storage. Frame 1 changes the logical mode and decoder state but can reuse the old native storage. The frame 1 decoder writes using the wider mode into the narrow storage.

Suggested Fix Direction

Before reusing native ImagingCore storage, Pillow should verify that the retained storage is compatible with the current logical image mode and size.

A central guard in ImageFile.load_prepare() could compare native storage mode/size against self.mode / self.size and allocate fresh storage when they differ. Alternatively, every mode-changing seek() / _open() path should explicitly invalidate _im before decoding.

Caution: TIFF has specialized tile-size behavior and already has a mode/size guard, so a central fix should avoid regressing TIFF tile-buffer handling.

Credit

Rotem Kama

Methodology Note

AI-assisted analysis was used for discovery and verification support. Claims in this report are limited to the local artifacts, controls, and command outputs described above.

Impact

  • process crash / denial of service,
  • native out-of-bounds write,
  • native over-read in the MPO path.

Stronger proven impact:

  • command execution in matching Python/Pillow runtime profiles through the MPO/JPEG path.

Server-side deployment impact:

  • Create a local vulnerable web upload service that accepts an unauthenticated MPO upload and automatically processes it with Pillow.
  • The attack is one HTTP request and requires no user interaction after upload.
  • The fixed harmless command-output marker succeeded 10/10 times.
  • The _im=None control was clean 10/10 times.

A read operation accesses a memory location beyond the intended buffer boundary. Typical impact: sensitive data disclosure or crash.

CVE-2026-96639 has a CVSS score of 9.8 (Critical). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (13.0.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

Pillow (>= 11.0.0, < 13.0.0)

Security releases

Pillow → 13.0.0 (pip)

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

Upgrade Pillow to 13.0.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-96639? CVE-2026-96639 is a critical-severity out-of-bounds read vulnerability in Pillow (pip), affecting versions >= 11.0.0, < 13.0.0. It is fixed in 13.0.0. A read operation accesses a memory location beyond the intended buffer boundary.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-96639? CVE-2026-96639 has a CVSS score of 9.8 (Critical). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of Pillow are affected by CVE-2026-96639? Pillow (pip) versions >= 11.0.0, < 13.0.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-96639? Yes. CVE-2026-96639 is fixed in 13.0.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-96639 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-96639 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
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-96639 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.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-96639? Upgrade Pillow to 13.0.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in Pillow

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.