Skip to content

vLLM image EXIF Rotation & PNG tRNS Transparency Not Normalized, Causing Mismatch Between Model Input and Expectations

Moderate
jperezdealgaba published GHSA-8jr5-v98p-w75m Jun 11, 2026

Package

pip vllm (pip)

Affected versions

>= 0.11.0

Patched versions

>=0.24.0

Description

Summary

Issue 1: EXIF orientation not normalized → The image orientation processed by the model differs from how humans view it, introducing interpretation bias.

Issue 2: PNG tRNS not explicitly flattened before converting to RGB → After conversion, transparent/semi-transparent pixels are rendered unexpectedly, making otherwise subtle overlay elements visible and distorting the input content. (This attack is similar to AlphaDog: RGBA handling is already correct in vLLM, but since tRNS permits RGB images, the correct processing path isn’t taken.)

Issue 3 : Pillow only loads the first frame when loading APNG or GIF files.


Root Cause

  • Rotation: After opening an image, ImageOps.exif_transpose is not called to normalize EXIF orientation.
  • Transparency: Only RGBA→RGB is flattened with a background; PNGs carrying tRNS in P/L/RGB + tRNS and other non-RGBA modes take the image.convert("RGB") path, which implicitly discards/remaps transparency semantics.

Affected Code

def _convert_image_mode(self, image: Image.Image) -> Image.Image:
"""Convert image mode with custom background color."""
if image.mode == self.image_mode:
return image
elif image.mode == "RGBA" and self.image_mode == "RGB":
return rgba_to_rgb(image, self.rgba_background_color)
else:
return convert_image_mode(image, self.image_mode)

def convert_image_mode(image: Image.Image, to_mode: str):
if image.mode == to_mode:
return image
elif image.mode == "RGBA" and to_mode == "RGB":
return rgba_to_rgb(image)
else:
return image.convert(to_mode)

def rgba_to_rgb(
image: Image.Image,
background_color: tuple[int, int, int] | list[int] = (255, 255, 255),
) -> Image.Image:
"""Convert an RGBA image to RGB with filled background color."""
assert image.mode == "RGBA"
converted = Image.new("RGB", image.size, background_color)
converted.paste(image, mask=image.split()[3]) # 3 is the alpha channel
return converted

Current state: ImageOps.exif_transpose is not used. (Although the rescale_image_size function (https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/blob/main/vllm/multimodal/image.py#L14) exists and includes a transpose parameter, I’ve found that it doesn’t seem to be called anywhere outside the test directory.)

Call order: _convert_image_mode runs first; if the conditions are met, convert_image_mode is called.

Issue: Only the “RGBA → RGB” path is explicitly flattened. P, L, or RGB with tRNS all fall back to image.convert("RGB"). For PNGs that include tRNS, convert("RGB") directly produces 24-bit RGB, leading to:

  • P mode: The transparent index becomes an actual RGB color (often black, white, or an undefined background), so transparency is lost.
  • L/LA and RGB + tRNS: convert("RGB") doesn’t composite against a chosen background first, so elements that relied on transparency to be hidden or softened become solid.

Impact & Scope

  • Impact: Pixels the model sees can diverge from operator expectations (due to orientation or transparency handling), potentially altering downstream reasoning.
  • Scope: The image I/O and mode-conversion paths in vllm/multimodal/image.py. The existing RGBA→RGB flattening is correct; the issues center on missing EXIF normalization and non-RGBA tRNS not being explicitly composited.

Case

EXIF: http://qiniu.funxingzuo.top/exif_orient_180.jpg
tRNS: http://qiniu.funxingzuo.top/hello.png

Fix

A fix for this vulnerability was merged here: #44974

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

CVE ID

CVE-2026-12491

Weaknesses

No CWEs

Credits