Skip to content

Pillow: NULL pointer dereference in Image.merge via an unvalidated band 0

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Oct 17, 2026 in python-pillow/Pillow • Updated Oct 21, 2026

Package

pip pillow (pip)

Affected versions

>= 12.0.0, < 13.0.0

Patched versions

13.0.0

Description

Summary

Image.merge() checks the mode of every input band except band 0. If band 0 is a single-band I or F image, the native merge routine reads a pixel pointer that is NULL for those modes and the process crashes. The IPTC plugin reaches this from a plain Image.open() followed by a load, and IPTC has no magic-byte prefilter, so a crafted file with no recognizable header can drive it.

Details

The validation loop skips band 0:

  • src/PIL/Image.py:3795 iterates for band in bands[1:] and checks mode and size only for those.

For an I or F image the 8-bit plane image8 is NULL (only image32 is set). ImagingMerge dereferences bands[0]->image8[y] for the multi-band output modes:

  • src/libImaging/Bands.c:302, :311, :321

The IPTC loader builds the band list from an attacker-typed sub-image and passes it to merge with the sub-image at index 0:

  • src/PIL/IptcImagePlugin.py:156-160
  • src/PIL/IptcImagePlugin.py:169 registers the opener with no accept function.

PoC

from PIL import Image

# Band 0 is a single-band "I" image: its image8 plane is NULL. merge() validates only
# bands[1:], so the native ImagingMerge dereferences the NULL plane for band 0.
band0 = Image.new("I", (4, 4))
Image.merge("RGB", [band0, Image.new("L", (4, 4)), Image.new("L", (4, 4))])

Run it:

$ python 02_poc.py
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

Observed on a source build of commit 3e2ab96.

Under AddressSanitizer:

==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x000000000000
    #0 ImagingMerge   src/libImaging/Bands.c:311
    #1 _merge         src/_imaging.c:2492
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: SEGV src/libImaging/Bands.c:311 in ImagingMerge

The null address confirms the dereference of the missing image8 plane for band 0.

Impact

NULL pointer dereference in a C extension. A crafted file opened and loaded through the IPTC path crashes the worker process. This is a hard crash, not a Python exception an application can catch.

References

@radarhere radarhere published to python-pillow/Pillow Oct 17, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Oct 19, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Oct 21, 2026
Reviewed Oct 21, 2026
Last updated Oct 21, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(21st percentile)

Weaknesses

NULL Pointer Dereference

The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-112405

GHSA ID

GHSA-cp9v-662q-vvx9

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.