CVE-2025-71375
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedpicklescan before 0.0.34 fails to detect the _operator.methodcaller built-in function when scanning pickle files for malicious code. Attackers can craft malicious pickle payloads using _operator.methodcaller that evade detection and execute arbitrary code when loaded by pickle.load().
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidencepicklescan before 0.0.34 fails to detect the _operator.methodcaller built-in function when scanning pickle files for malicious code. Attackers can craft malicious pickle payloads using _operator.methodcaller that evade detection and execute arbitrary code when loaded by pickle.load(). This represents a detection bypass vulnerability in the scanner's code-execution pattern matching.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify picklescan is installedRun 'pip show picklescan' or 'pip list | grep picklescan' to confirm the package is present in your Python environmentAffected if picklescan is installed and being used to scan pickle files from untrusted sources
-
Determine installed picklescan versionRun 'pip show picklescan' and note the Version field, or use 'pip list --format=freeze | grep picklescan'Affected if The version is below 0.0.34
-
Confirm pickle file scanning is in useReview your code or pipeline to verify picklescan is being called to scan pickle files, typically via command line 'picklescan <file>' or programmatic APIAffected if picklescan is actively used to scan pickle files from untrusted or external sources
-
Check if scanner detects code execution patternsTest picklescan against a pickle file containing _operator.methodcaller to see if it is flagged as malicious; this requires a sample malicious pickle fileAffected if picklescan fails to detect or warn about _operator.methodcaller patterns in scanned pickle files
If picklescan version is below 0.0.34 and is used to scan pickle files from untrusted sources, malicious payloads using _operator.methodcaller may evade detection.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade picklescan to version 0.0.34 or later to receive the updated detection for _operator.methodcaller. Additionally, avoid loading pickle files from untrusted sources, as scanners may have other bypasses.
picklescan 0.0.34
- Upgrade picklescan to version 0.0.34 or later using your package manager (e.g., pip install picklescan>=0.0.34)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version (e.g., picklescan --version)
- If you have existing pickle files that were scanned with the vulnerable version, re-scan them with the updated version to ensure they are properly analyzed
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-71375 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-71375 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data