vulnerability / NVI-00010684 / Revision 3
Pillow PDF append accepts malformed shared page-tree DAG causing resource exhaustion
GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for Pillow. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.
This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.
01 / Meaning
Why it matters
Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.
0.604%
FIRST EPSS model v2026.06.15; exploitation probability over 30 days, percentile 0.49034. Missing scores are unknown.
As of · FIRST EPSS
02 / Applicability
The affected context
Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.
Pillow
source listed>= 5.1.0, < 13.0.0
### Summary Pillow's documented PDF append path can spend disproportionate CPU time on a compact malformed PDF page tree. An attacker who can supply an existing PDF to an application that appends an image with `Image.save(..., format="PDF", append=True)` can provide a malformed `/Pages` tree where each level repeats the same child `/Pages` reference in `/Kids`. Pillow treats the graph as a tree and expands each repeated reference in `PdfParser.linearize_page_tree()` without tracking visited or duplicate indirect references. In the bounded proof below, a `1410`-byte PDF expands to `8192` page references from one distinct page object and takes about `9.6` seconds through the append path. A comparable linear control with the same depth stays at one page reference and completes in about `0.02` seconds. This is in scope for Pillow's security policy because it is reproducible in `main`, affects the latest public release tested (`12.3.0`), and is not just an unexpected Python exception. The vulnerable operation accepts attacker-controlled PDF bytes through Pillow's PDF parser and causes deterministic resource consumption before normal completion. ### Details #### Affected versions -
03 / Response
What to do next
- investigate
Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.
Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. FIRST EPSS
A fixed release is not deployment evidence.
Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.
04 / Limits
What this report cannot establish
- Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
05 / Provenance
Sources you can inspect
Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.
- GHSA-mrfp-p49p-3hf2 ↗
GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory
Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.
- CVE-2026-96640 ↗
FIRST EPSS · official catalog
Observed . FIRST EPSS; probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, not local compromise. Dataset date/model retained; FIRST services terms apply.
Public revision history
Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.
- Revision 3 ·
Dated EPSS estimate updated; this is not a new disclosure or proof of exploitation.
- Revision 2 ·
Dated EPSS estimate updated; this is not a new disclosure or proof of exploitation.
- Revision 1 ·
First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.