mal-2026-875
Vulnerability from ossf_malicious_packages
-= Per source details. Do not edit below this line.=-
Source: kam193 (c4ab5c0ca76295a578d62119bf6932953098ec9ecd0bb7f21b397da85b08d5b8)
Installing the package or importing the module exfiltrates basic information about the host, and the package has no other purpose.
Category: PROBABLY_PENTEST - Packages looking like typical pentest packages, but also anything that looks like testing, exploring pre-prepared kits, research & co, with clearly low-harm possibilities.
Campaign: GENERIC-standard-pypi-install-pentest
Reasons (based on the campaign):
-
The package contains code to exfiltrate basic data from the system, like IP or username. It has a limited risk.
-
The package overrides the install command in setup.py to execute malicious code during installation.
Source: ossf-package-analysis (0a92fb7d81045a82240752c9122482082867f85a64640d5d56fd4f9a685f1425)
The OpenSSF Package Analysis project identified 'displaydoc' @ 1.0.0 (pypi) as malicious.
It is considered malicious because:
-
The package communicates with a domain associated with malicious activity.
-
The package executes one or more commands associated with malicious behavior.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "displaydoc"
},
"versions": [
"1.0.0"
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"contact": [
"https://github.com/kam193",
"https://bad-packages.kam193.eu/"
],
"name": "Kamil Ma\u0144kowski (kam193)",
"type": "REPORTER"
},
{
"contact": [
"https://github.com/ossf/package-analysis",
"https://openssf.slack.com/channels/package_analysis"
],
"name": "OpenSSF: Package Analysis",
"type": "FINDER"
}
],
"database_specific": {
"malicious-packages-origins": [
{
"import_time": "2026-02-13T10:47:36.997407543Z",
"modified_time": "2026-02-13T10:45:53Z",
"sha256": "0a92fb7d81045a82240752c9122482082867f85a64640d5d56fd4f9a685f1425",
"source": "ossf-package-analysis",
"versions": [
"1.0.0"
]
},
{
"id": "pypi/GENERIC-standard-pypi-install-pentest/displaydoc",
"import_time": "2026-02-13T11:44:08.08137474Z",
"modified_time": "2026-02-13T11:04:11.944005Z",
"sha256": "c4ab5c0ca76295a578d62119bf6932953098ec9ecd0bb7f21b397da85b08d5b8",
"source": "kam193",
"versions": [
"1.0.0"
]
}
]
},
"details": "\n---\n_-= Per source details. Do not edit below this line.=-_\n\n## Source: kam193 (c4ab5c0ca76295a578d62119bf6932953098ec9ecd0bb7f21b397da85b08d5b8)\nInstalling the package or importing the module exfiltrates basic information about the host, and the package has no other purpose.\n\n\n---\n\nCategory: PROBABLY_PENTEST - Packages looking like typical pentest packages, but also anything that looks like testing, exploring pre-prepared kits, research \u0026 co, with clearly low-harm possibilities.\n\n\nCampaign: GENERIC-standard-pypi-install-pentest\n\n\nReasons (based on the campaign):\n\n\n - The package contains code to exfiltrate basic data from the system, like IP or username. It has a limited risk.\n\n\n - The package overrides the install command in setup.py to execute malicious code during installation.\n\n## Source: ossf-package-analysis (0a92fb7d81045a82240752c9122482082867f85a64640d5d56fd4f9a685f1425)\nThe OpenSSF Package Analysis project identified \u0027displaydoc\u0027 @ 1.0.0 (pypi) as malicious.\n\nIt is considered malicious because:\n\n- The package communicates with a domain associated with malicious activity.\n\n- The package executes one or more commands associated with malicious behavior.\n",
"id": "MAL-2026-875",
"modified": "2026-02-13T11:45:52Z",
"published": "2026-02-13T10:45:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bad-packages.kam193.eu/pypi/package/displaydoc"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.4",
"summary": "Malicious code in displaydoc (PyPI)"
}
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.