BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2025-62373High confidence

Pipecat vulnerable to Remote Code Execution by Pickle Deserialization via LivekitFrameSerializer

pipecat-ai · pipecat

9.8CriticalCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Within 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Mitigation available
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2025-209570

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 72 hours

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path and a public exploit reference; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.

Mitigation available
01

What, why and how

Pipecat is an open-source Python framework for building real-time voice and multimodal conversational agents. Versions 0.0.41 through 0.0.93 have a vulnerability in `LivekitFrameSerializer` – an optional, non-default, undocumented frame serializer class (now deprecated) intended for LiveKit integration. The class's `deserialize()` method uses Python's `pickle.loads()` on data received from WebSocket clients without any validation or sanitization. This means that a malicious WebSocket client can send a crafted pickle payload to execute arbitrary code on the Pipecat server. The vulnerable code resides in `src/pipecat/serializers/livekit.py` (around line 73), where untrusted WebSocket message data is passed directly into `pickle.loads()` for deserialization. If a Pipecat server is configured to use LivekitFrameSerializer and is listening on an external interface (e.g. 0.0.0.0), an attacker on the network (or the internet, if the service is exposed) could achieve remote code execution (RCE) on the server by sending a malicious pickle payload. Version 0.0.94 contains a fix. Users of Pipecat should avoid or replace unsafe deserialization and improve network security configuration. The best mitigation is to stop using the vulnerable LivekitFrameSerializer altogether. Those who require LiveKit functionality should upgrade to the latest Pipecat version and switch to the recommended `LiveKitTransport` or another secure method provided by the framework. Additionally, always follow secure coding practices: never trust client-supplied data, and avoid Python pickle (or similar unsafe deserialization) in network-facing components.

What

Pipecat is an open-source Python framework for building real-time voice and multimodal conversational agents. Versions 0.0.41 through 0.0.93 have a vulnerability in `LivekitFrameSerializer` – an optional, non-default, undocumented frame serializer class (now deprecated) intended for LiveKit integration. The class's `deserialize()` method uses Python's `pickle.loads()` on data received from WebSocket clients without any validation or sanitization. This means that a malicious WebSocket client can send a crafted pickle payload to execute arbitrary code on the Pipecat server. The vulnerable code resides in `src/pipecat/serializers/livekit.py` (around line 73), where untrusted WebSocket message data is passed directly into `pickle.loads()` for deserialization. If a Pipecat server is configured to use LivekitFrameSerializer and is listening on an external interface (e.g. 0.0.0.0), an attacker on the network (or the internet, if the service is exposed) could achieve remote code execution (RCE) on the server by sending a malicious pickle payload. Version 0.0.94 contains a fix. Users of Pipecat should avoid or replace unsafe deserialization and improve network security configuration. The best mitigation is to stop using the vulnerable LivekitFrameSerializer altogether. Those who require LiveKit functionality should upgrade to the latest Pipecat version and switch to the recommended `LiveKitTransport` or another secure method provided by the framework. Additionally, always follow secure coding practices: never trust client-supplied data, and avoid Python pickle (or similar unsafe deserialization) in network-facing components.

Why

Attacker-influenced serialised data is reconstructed as trusted objects, which can invoke dangerous application behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.

What

Pipecat is an open-source Python framework for building real-time voice and multimodal conversational agents. Versions 0.0.41 through 0.0.93 have a vulnerability in `LivekitFrameSerializer` – an optional, non-default, undocumented frame serializer class (now deprecated) intended for LiveKit integration. The class's `deserialize()` method uses Python's `pickle.loads()` on data received from WebSocket clients without any validation or sanitization. This means that a malicious WebSocket client can send a crafted pickle payload to execute arbitrary code on the Pipecat server. The vulnerable code resides in `src/pipecat/serializers/livekit.py` (around line 73), where untrusted WebSocket message data is passed directly into `pickle.loads()` for deserialization. If a Pipecat server is configured to use LivekitFrameSerializer and is listening on an external interface (e.g. 0.0.0.0), an attacker on the network (or the internet, if the service is exposed) could achieve remote code execution (RCE) on the server by sending a malicious pickle payload. Version 0.0.94 contains a fix. Users of Pipecat should avoid or replace unsafe deserialization and improve network security configuration. The best mitigation is to stop using the vulnerable LivekitFrameSerializer altogether. Those who require LiveKit functionality should upgrade to the latest Pipecat version and switch to the recommended `LiveKitTransport` or another secure method provided by the framework. Additionally, always follow secure coding practices: never trust client-supplied data, and avoid Python pickle (or similar unsafe deserialization) in network-facing components.

Why

Attacker-influenced serialised data is reconstructed as trusted objects, which can invoke dangerous application behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
Reference recorded

A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.

Likely attack path
a network path → Deserialization of Untrusted Data → execute code or commands in the affected security context
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-502

CWE-502: Deserialization of Untrusted Data. The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
NetworkUnauthenticatedRemote code executionCWE-502Public exploit reference
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Mitigation available
Affected
>= 0.0.41, < 0.0.94
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
Apply the mitigation in the linked authoritative guidance while planning the vendor's permanent fix.
Workaround
A mitigation or workaround reference is available from the source linked below; validate it against the affected product and version.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 23 Apr 2026 · Last source change 23 Apr 2026, 18:35 UTC · CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-209570
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2025-62373 · cve.blacktree.nl