GHSA-63CW-57P8-FM3P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-27 20:10 – Updated: 2026-01-27 20:10
VLAI?
Summary
PyTorch Vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via Untrusted Checkpoint Files
Details

Summary

A vulnerability in PyTorch's weights_only unpickler allows an attacker to craft a malicious checkpoint file (.pth) that, when loaded with torch.load(..., weights_only=True), can corrupt memory and potentially lead to arbitrary code execution.

Vulnerability Details

The weights_only=True unpickler failed to properly validate pickle opcodes and storage metadata, allowing:

  1. Heap memory corruption via SETITEM/SETITEMS opcodes applied to non-dictionary types
  2. Storage size mismatch between declared element count and actual data in the archive

Impact

An attacker who can convince a user to load a malicious checkpoint file may achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the victim's process.

Credit

Ji'an Zhou

Severity ?
8.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "pytorch"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.10.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-24747"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-502",
      "CWE-94"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-27T20:10:54Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nA vulnerability in PyTorch\u0027s `weights_only` unpickler allows an attacker to craft a malicious checkpoint file (`.pth`) that, when loaded with `torch.load(..., weights_only=True)`, can corrupt memory and potentially lead to arbitrary code execution.\n\n### Vulnerability Details\n\nThe `weights_only=True` unpickler failed to properly validate pickle opcodes and storage metadata, allowing:\n\n1. **Heap memory corruption** via `SETITEM`/`SETITEMS` opcodes applied to non-dictionary types\n2. **Storage size mismatch** between declared element count and actual data in the archive\n\n### Impact\n\nAn attacker who can convince a user to load a malicious checkpoint file may achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the victim\u0027s process.\n\n\n# Credit\nJi\u0027an Zhou",
  "id": "GHSA-63cw-57p8-fm3p",
  "modified": "2026-01-27T20:10:54Z",
  "published": "2026-01-27T20:10:54Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/security/advisories/GHSA-63cw-57p8-fm3p"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/163105"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/163122/commit/954dc5183ee9205cbe79876ad05dd2d9ae752139"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/releases/tag/v2.10.0"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "PyTorch Vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via Untrusted Checkpoint Files"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.