Skip to content

CVE-2025-56005

Deserialization of Untrusted Data: Is CVE-2025-56005 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
9.8 Critical
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
17%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Officially disputed

The CVE record itself is disputed or rejected upstream — a strong candidate for a false positive in scanners. Confirm with a verdict.

Based on NVD record status

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

An undocumented and unsafe feature in the PLY (Python Lex-Yacc) library 3.11 allows Remote Code Execution (RCE) via the `picklefile` parameter in the `yacc()` function. This parameter accepts a `.pkl` file that is deserialized with `pickle.load()` without validation. Because `pickle` allows execution of embedded code via `__reduce__()`, an attacker can achieve code execution by passing a malicious pickle file. The parameter is not mentioned in official documentation or the GitHub repository, yet it is active in the PyPI version. This introduces a stealthy backdoor and persistence risk. NOTE: A third-party states that this vulnerability should be rejected because the proof of concept does not demonstrate arbitrary code execution and fails to complete successfully.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-56005
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-56005/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-56005)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-56005"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-56005/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-56005"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet. FIRST EPSS estimates about a 17% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, which is high relative to most CVEs. It is reachable over the network with no authentication and no user interaction, which is the most dangerous profile.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data.