VulnerabilityPublished 29 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-96642: Pillow · TarIO negative size field causes infinite CPU-spin loop

Affects aiderSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-96642· High 7.1

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 07:30 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.1High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: High
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 Oct 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewaider`pkg:brew/aider`Other threats	Affected >=0.86.1_1	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

### Summary `TarIO.__init__` does not check that a tar header's size field is positive. A crafted header with a negative size makes it seek backward onto itself. This causes an infinite loop that uses 100% CPU and never returns. ### Details `TarIO.__init__` reads 512-byte tar headers one at a time, looking for a member with a given name. For each header it reads the size field and skips ahead to the next header: ```python size = int(s[124:135], 8) ... self.fh.seek((size + 511) & (~511), io.SEEK_CUR) ``` There is no check that size is zero or more. A tar header can set this field to a negative octal value. For size = -512, the seek offset comes out to exactly -512, which cancels the 512 bytes the loop had just read. The file position goes right back to where this loop step started. The loop only stops on end of file or when a header name starts with a null byte. Neither happens, since the same header keeps showing up again. The loop never ends on its own. ### Steps to reproduce This uses Tests/images/hopper.tar, a normal file already in the Pillow test suite. It only changes the size field of the first header. ```python from PIL import TarIO with open("Tests/images/hopper.tar", "rb") as f: data = bytearray(f.read()) # Set the size field (bytes 124 to 135) to a negative octal value. # Octal 1000 is 512, so this is size = -512. data[124:135] = b" -00001000" with open("poisoned.tar", "wb") as f: f.write(data) # "does-not-exist" does not match the header name, so TarIO must # keep scanning. This call never returns. TarIO.TarIO("poisoned.tar", "does-not-exist") ``` We confirmed this with ps. The process sits at 98 to 100% CPU and never exits on its own. It only stops if killed from outside. A pytest version of this, using pytest-timeout so the test does not hang forever, is below. On the current code it fails with Failed: Timeout (>3.0s) from pytest-timeout. ```python from __future__ import annotations from pathlib import Path import pytest from PIL import TarIO SOURCE_TAR = "Tests/images/hopper.tar" @pytest.mark.timeout(3) def test_negative_size_field_does_not_hang(tmp_path: Path) -> None: with open(SOURCE_TAR, "rb") as f: data = bytearray(f.read()) data[124:135] = b" -00001000" # octal 1000 = decimal 512, negated poisoned_tar = tmp_path / "poisoned.tar" poisoned_tar.write_bytes(data) with pytest.raises((OSError, ValueError)): with TarIO.TarIO(str(poisoned_tar), "does-not-exist"): pass ``` ### Impact - Availability: an attacker who can get a crafted tar file passed to TarIO.TarIO() can hang the process at full CPU with a file just over 512 bytes. - Confidentiality: none. - Integrity: none. - TarIO is a small helper class. It is not used by Image.open() and is not on the default path most Pillow users hit. An app has to call PIL.TarIO.TarIO(path, member_name) directly for this to matter, which some apps do to read an image out of a tar archive.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…