Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
This flaw affects picklescan, a tool used to inspect Python pickle files. Older versions can miss a dangerous built-in function inside a pickle, so a file marked as safe could still run attacker-controlled code when later loaded by Python.
Executive priority
Prioritize remediation where pickle files enter production, CI, or ML pipelines from outside trusted teams. The business risk is code execution through trusted automation rather than broad internet self-exploitation.
Technical view
picklescan before 0.0.29 does not detect trace.Trace.runctx when it appears in pickle reduce methods. A malicious pickle can bypass scanning and execute code during pickle.load(). The CVSS 8.1 score reflects network delivery, low complexity, no privileges, and required user interaction.
Likely exposure
Exposure is most likely in ML, data science, or artifact-processing workflows that accept pickle files from users, partners, model hubs, CI jobs, or automated ingestion and rely on picklescan before loading them.
Exploitation context
The provided sources do not show CISA KEV listing or active exploitation. Exploitation requires a victim workflow to scan and then load a malicious pickle file with pickle.load().
Researcher notes
The key bypass primitive named by the sources is trace.Trace.runctx inside pickle reduce methods. Evidence is limited to the advisory data provided; no public exploitation confirmation is included in the source bundle.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade picklescan to 0.0.29 or later.
- Do not load pickle files from untrusted or unauthenticated sources.
- Treat scanning as a detection aid, not a sandbox or trust guarantee.
- Add provenance checks for model and dataset artifacts.
- Check vendor advisories for any newer guidance.
Validation and detection
- Inventory picklescan versions in lockfiles, containers, and CI images.
- Find workflows that call pickle.load() after picklescan approval.
- Confirm artifact ingestion blocks untrusted pickle files.
- Review recent pickle submissions from external sources.
- Verify dependency updates reached runtime environments.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-693: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupExecution behavior lookup
The CVE wording references code or command execution, so execution technique review may help defensive triage. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2025-71352 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- High
- CVSS
- 8.1 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
2 official scoresWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N2.85.2VulnCheckCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N——VulnCheckVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 4.0 score
7.6HighVector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Base CVSS 3.1 score
8.1HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-g344-hcph-8vgg)CVE reference, VulnCheck · vendor-advisory
- VulnCheck Advisory: picklescan - Remote Code Execution via Undetected trace.Trace.runctx in Pickle FilesCVE reference, VulnCheck · third-party-advisory
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Protection Mechanism Failure
Protection Mechanism Failure represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.