GHSA-36v8-mpjm-8j5r CVE-2026-68586 GO-2026-6379
SiYuan: Cross-boundary content disclosure via getBacklinkDoc/getBackmentionDoc (publish mode): reader-reachable rendered DOM of publish-forbidden docs; sibling list endpoints are filtered
- Severity
- 9.2 / 10
- Critical · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.41%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 35.20% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-862 Missing Authorization
- Fix
0.0.0-20260721014413-f45749a7ef6e- Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later
Description
CVE: This vulnerability corresponds to CVE-2026-68586.
Summary
The backlink API splits into list endpoints (which documents reference a block) and content endpoints (the rendered text of those referencing blocks). The list endpoints apply a publish-access filter, the content endpoints do not. As a result, /api/ref/getBacklinkDoc and /api/ref/getBackmentionDoc return the rendered DOM of blocks belonging to a publish-forbidden document to an anonymous reader, with no access check.
Both content endpoints are gated by CheckAuth only, reachable by the publish RoleReader token and by the anonymous account when Publish.Auth.Enable is false.
Details
The asymmetry between the list and content sides is the tell that this is an oversight, not intended behavior:
| Endpoint | Returns | Publish-access filter | Route |
|---|---|---|---|
getBacklink |
list (*Path) |
FilterPathsByPublishAccess - present |
CheckAuth |
getBacklink2 |
list (*Path) |
FilterPathsByPublishAccess - present |
CheckAuth |
getBacklinkDoc |
rendered DOM | none | CheckAuth |
getBackmentionDoc |
rendered DOM | none | CheckAuth |
model/backlink.go contains no publish-access reference anywhere, and Backlink.DOM is the rendered HTML of the referencing blocks. getBacklinkDoc(defID, refTreeID) returns the rendered content of blocks in refTreeID - including a publish-forbidden, publish-disabled, or password-protected document with no access check. The filtered list siblings (getBacklink/getBacklink2) demonstrate that the publish boundary is meant to apply to this data; the content endpoints simply omit it.
A reader is not limited to the filtered backlink list, they call getBacklinkDoc directly with any refTreeID. This also yields a reference-existence oracle: the response reveals whether the forbidden document refTreeID references the block defID.
Proof of Concept
Reproduced on a local instance (SiYuan running locally, publish mode enabled on port 6808, publish Basic Auth disabled). Setup: a publish-forbidden document D (REFTREEID) whose body contains the unique marker SECRET_MARKER_77 and which references a block DEFID in a separate known document.
1. Mark the target document publish-forbidden (admin action, the boundary that should block reads):
POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/filetree/setPublishAccess
Authorization: Token <admin-token>
{"id":"REFTREEID","visible":false,"password":"","disable":true}
2. Baseline: the list endpoint correctly hides the forbidden doc from the reader (anonymous, port 6808):
POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/ref/getBacklink2
{"id":"DEFID","k":"","mk":""}
The returned backlinks do not include the forbidden document D, the list side is filtered.
3. Disclosure: the content endpoint returns the forbidden doc's blocks anyway (anonymous, port 6808):
POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/ref/getBacklinkDoc
{"defID":"DEFID","refTreeID":"REFTREEID","keyword":""}
Returns HTTP 200; data.backlinks[].dom contains SECRET_MARKER_77, the rendered content of the publish-forbidden document, returned to an anonymous reader. getBackmentionDoc behaves identically for mention-type references.
Impact
An anonymous reader (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish RoleReader, can read the rendered content of a publish-forbidden document's referencing blocks, defeating a boundary the administrator explicitly configured, and can determine whether a forbidden document references a given block (a reference-existence oracle).
Precondition (stated honestly): the request requires refTreeID (the forbidden document's ID) and defID (a block it references). defID may be any published/known block, so if the forbidden document references any public content, defID is known and only refTreeID need be supplied. Block/document IDs for forbidden documents are also obtainable from other CheckAuth-only endpoints that lack the publish-access filter (reported separately). This endpoint alone does not enumerate arbitrary documents; it discloses content once an ID is known.
Impact is confidentiality-only: content disclosure plus a reference-existence oracle, no modification. No admin role, CSRF token, or write permission is required. Encrypted notebooks are out of scope.
Suggested fix
Apply the same publish-access check the list siblings use. In getBacklinkDoc/getBackmentionDoc, filter each Backlink by its source document's box/path via CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore plus the publish-password cookie check consistent with FilterPathsByPublishAccess in getBacklink/getBacklink2. Any endpoint returning rendered block DOM should enforce the same publish boundary as the corresponding list endpoint.
Affected versions
Go
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel | < 0.0.0-20260721014413-f45749a7ef6e |
0.0.0-20260721014413-f45749a7ef6e |
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.
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel Go → 0.0.0-20260721014413-f45749a7ef6e
- go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260721014413-f45749a7ef6e && go mod tidy
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 9.2
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- High
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
- Exploit maturity
- Not defined
- Scope
- X
CVSS 3.1 8.6
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-862: Missing Authorization
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-xp3q-r38w-vgqm SiYuan: The publish filter for local storage returns the administrator's entire storage map with only three keys sanitized | Medium | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-9cqf-hhrq-7v45 SiYuan: getAttributeViewSearchTarget returns database row content to anonymous readers with no publish-access check, reopening the class closed one day earlier at the adjacent route | High | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-57v5-wqx3-cgj4 SiYuan: Database view structure (all view names, layout types and per-field visibility) is returned to anonymous readers by /api/av/getAttributeViewFieldViews | Medium | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-4wwp-f6gw-6qm5 SiYuan: TLS Private Keys Readable via getFile (Incomplete Blocklist) | High | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-3cm4-ccvw-6xr6 SiYuan: /history/*path and /repo/diff/*path potentially exposing historical snapshots of data/.siyuan/publishAccess.json and data/templates/* | Medium | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-x8gv-g2g3-65fj SiYuan Agent Tools SSRF via DNS-Rebinding TOCTOU (Bypass of CheckHostSSRF) | High | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-p23f-cm6q-2qp8 SiYuan MCP asset.upload Reads Arbitrary Absolute File Paths (Workspace Boundary Bypass) | Medium | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
| GHSA-rpx2-p6hp-x5gj SiYuan: Missing consistency check between packageName and repoURL/repoHash in bazaar package install allows overwriting an existing, trusted plugin | Medium | Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel |
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