PyPI · filelock
filelock ReadWriteLock: SQLite reopens the lock database by name, so a planted symlink or journal file makes the lock user's process overwrite or unlink its own files
ReadWriteLock and AsyncReadWriteLock (the SQLite-backed reader/writer lock) hand SQLite a name they do not control. On Linux the lock validates its database through a descriptor (the number the kernel gives a process for an open file). It then connects SQLite to /proc/self/fd/<n>, a Linux path that names the process's own open file n. SQLite turns that path back into a plain path and reopens it by name, following symlinks (a symlink is a file that points at another path). On every POSIX route SQLite also acts on -journal, -wal and -shm files it finds beside that name. Those are SQLite's side files: the rollback journal (pages saved to undo an interrupted write), the write-ahead log or WAL (changes kept outside the main file), and the shared-memory index for the WAL.
Another local user who can create or rename entries in the directory that holds the lock database can turn this against the user running the lock (below: the lock user). Such a directory is a 0777 or group-writable cache, build or project directory without the sticky bit (a directory flag that lets only a file's owner remove or rename it). That other user can make the lock user's ordinary read_lock() or write_lock() write bytes of the other user's choosing into the lock user's own files. The same position lets the other user make that call create or unlink files of the lock user, admit a reader beside a writer, or kill the holder. All of this runs with the lock user's privileges. In a sticky directory such as /tmp a planted -wal file makes every acquire fail. Affected versions are filelock 3.20.4 through 4.2.0 (the /proc/self/fd redirect since 4.0.9, the side-file variants since 3.20.4).
Anthropic's OSS Scanner reported this in private as ANT-2026-KMJ2575J [high, CWE-363]: ReadWriteLock: SQLite still follows planted symlinks, overwriting files.
CVSS 3.1 CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H scores 7.1 (High). AV:L (local): the other user needs an account on the same host. PR:L (low privileges): an ordinary account is enough. UI:N (no user interaction). AC:L (low attack complexity): the planted-journal variant needs no race, and the redirect won 77 of 77 attempts. I:H (high integrity impact): the other user writes bytes of their choosing into files of the lock user and unlinks files of their choosing. A:H (high availability impact): the other user makes every acquire fail or kills the lock holder. C:N (no confidentiality impact): the other user learns nothing. S:U (scope unchanged): the effect stays within the lock user's own privileges.
Classification from the external review: conditional security, a cross-user effect that exists only when another user can change names in the lock database's directory. The review notes that the 77/77 inotify result (inotify is a Linux interface that reports file events) is stronger evidence than a theoretical TOCTOU (a time-of-check to time-of-use race). The scanner rated it high. The review accepts the mechanism and narrows it to that precondition.
0777 directory or a group-writable one (including a setgid 2775 project directory shared with that account), in each case without the sticky bit. The lock user's lock must be able to open the database read-write, so a database the other user creates is 0666. filelock itself creates the database 0600./tmp, /var/tmp, any 1777 directory) narrow the finding rather than exclude it. The redirect and the journal replay do not reach a database the lock user owns there (tested with fs.protected_regular=2). What remains is a planted non-empty <db>-wal (any mode; a directory or FIFO works too) that the lock user cannot unlink. It makes every acquire raise sqlite3.OperationalError: disk I/O error. A hard link (a second name for the same file) to a file of the lock user at the lock path also remains, if fs.protected_hardlinks=0.fs.protected_regular (1 or 2 is the systemd default on most distributions; the kernel's own default is 0) keeps a user from opening a file another user owns in a sticky world-writable directory. Where it is 0, the other user can own the database in /tmp, and SQLite follows a planted symlink itself (not tested). fs.protected_hardlinks=1 (most distributions; kernel default 0) blocks a hard link of a lock user's file onto the lock path. Neither setting affects a non-sticky shared directory./proc/self/fd redirect is Linux with /proc mounted, 4.0.9 and later. The side-file variants (-journal, -wal, -shm) exist on every POSIX route. On the hard-link route (macOS since 4.1.1 for every connection, Linux without /proc) they need the link-directory swap described under "Mechanism", so a non-sticky parent. Neither the scanner nor the review executed on macOS; the statement rests on the platform branch and the identical code after it. Windows does not take this path.At the scanned commit b831496b0273: _connect_through_descriptor builds /proc/self/fd/<n> and hands it to sqlite3.connect. The assumption is the comment at line 63, "Descriptor paths reopen the validated inode" (an inode is the kernel's identity for a file, independent of its name). SQLite first reads the file it opened at PRAGMA journal_mode=MEMORY, line 816. The check in _raise_if_database_replaced at line 836 runs only after BEGIN. Both _open_lock_database and _raise_if_wal inspect the descriptor, not the file SQLite is on. The one-level hard link of the macOS route is _link_beside.
The /proc/self/fd redirect came with 4d45e83 ("Merge commit from fork", the fix for GHSA-j8f7-rjxc-mr56), first released in 4.0.9 (verified: git tag --contains 4d45e83 gives 4.0.9); 4.0.8 does not have it. The side-file variants are older. They reproduce on cfd4446 ("feat(lock): add SQLite-based ReadWriteLock (#399)"), first released in 3.20.4 (verified), which passed the lock path straight to sqlite3.connect.
On Linux the lock opens the database with O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_NOFOLLOW|O_NONBLOCK. It checks through the descriptor that the file is a regular file and not a WAL database. It then calls sqlite3.connect("/proc/self/fd/<n>") and expects SQLite to reopen the validated inode. SQLite does not open that name. It runs readlink() on it, which yields the path string the kernel reports for the descriptor at that moment, and opens that string by path, following every symlink. Without inter
Is your project exposed to this? Stateward checks every dependency on every pull request and flags it only if your code actually reaches it.
Check my repoSources: CISA KEV (public domain), OSV.dev & GitHub Advisory Database (CC-BY-4.0), FIRST EPSS, NVD/CWE (public domain). Served live from the Stateward advisory database.