Skip to content

GHSA-9cqf-hhrq-7v45 CVE-2026-73608 GO-2026-6632

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 Go
Severity
8.6 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.30%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 23.31% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-862 Missing Authorization
Fix
0.0.0-20260812083335-251596fc0de2
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

Scope note

This endpoint does not exist in v3.7.3 or on master. It was introduced on the development branch by commit 9b8e8956f on 2026-07-27 and is present on the current development head. No released stable version is affected.

Summary

/api/av/getAttributeViewSearchTarget is registered with CheckAuth only and performs no authorization of any kind. Given a database identifier and a keyword, it searches that database's rows and returns matching content, regardless of whether the caller may see the database, the rows, or the notebook holding them.

Commit 64c26e74b on 2026-07-26 closed a reader-reachable gap on getAttributeViewFieldViews by adding CheckReadonly at router line 536. 9b8e8956f, the following day, registered this endpoint at line 535 without it. The new route returns more than the one that was just closed: row content rather than field-visibility metadata.

Details

Route. kernel/api/router.go:535 on the development branch:

ginServer.Handle("POST", "/api/av/getAttributeViewSearchTarget", model.CheckAuth, getAttributeViewSearchTarget)

No CheckReadonly, no CheckAdminRole.

Handler. kernel/api/av.go parses its arguments and calls model.GetAttributeViewSearchTarget(id, keywords). IsReadOnlyRoleContext, publishAccess and any encrypted-notebook check are all absent. The sink is kernel/model/attribute_view_render.go:69.

The adjacent routes make the omission stark. Lines 533 to 541 all handle the same data class:

Line Route Guard
534 getAttributeViewKeys CheckAuth, filters in-body for readers
535 getAttributeViewSearchTarget CheckAuth, nothing
536 getAttributeViewFieldViews CheckAuth, CheckReadonly
540 searchAttributeView CheckAuth, CheckReadonly
541 getAttributeView CheckAuth, CheckReadonly

The guard at 536 is the one added by 64c26e74b. The new route sits directly above it without one.

Why this is not bounded by identifier guessing. The closest functional sibling, renderAttributeView, applies two distinct reader protections:

  1. A containing-document gate, CheckAttributeViewBlockAccessableByPublishAccess, which is the full gate including CheckPublishAuthCookie.
  2. Per-item filtering, FilterAttributeViewByPublishAccess, using the itemAccess and attributeAccess maps. This strips rows bound to restricted blocks out of views the reader is otherwise entitled to see.

The second layer is what makes this exploitable without guesswork. A reader takes a database block identifier from the published DOM of a page they are allowed to view, then queries this endpoint against that same database and receives precisely the rows renderAttributeView removed from the view they were served. GetAttributeViewSearchTarget reaches the same internal render function; it simply bypasses the API-layer gate.

Two aggravating properties.

getAttributeViewSearchMatches runs strings.Contains across every value of every key, and the response carries MatchedKeyID alongside the title. That is a substring oracle over every column, so a caller can test for content without needing to retrieve it wholesale.

The path also branches on IsEncryptedBox(tree.Box) into ParseAttributeViewInBox, so it reads encrypted notebooks while they are unlocked. isEncryptedNotebookDeniedForPublish appears seventeen times across the block, ref, outline, search and filetree paths, and does not appear in av.go at all.

Extraction is iterative. Each request returns a single row. Systematic recovery of a database therefore requires many requests rather than one bulk response. There is no rate limiting on the path, and the substring oracle narrows the search considerably, but I mention it so the effort is not overstated.

Proof of Concept

Precondition: a development-branch build, publish mode enabled (default port 6808), anonymous when Publish.Auth.Enable is false. A published page embedding a database whose view contains rows bound to blocks the reader cannot access.

Step 1, take the database block identifier from the published page's DOM. It is present in the served markup.

Step 2, confirm what the reader is supposed to see:

POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/av/renderAttributeView
{"id":"<database block id>"}

→ 200, rows bound to restricted blocks are absent

Step 3, retrieve them anyway:

POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/av/getAttributeViewSearchTarget
{"id":"<same database block id>","keywords":"<term>"}

→ 200, matching rows including those step 2 withheld,
       with MatchedKeyID identifying the column that matched

The differential between steps 2 and 3, on one session against one database, is the finding.

Impact

An anonymous reader in publish mode, or any publish RoleReader, reads the content of database rows that the publish filters deliberately withhold, including rows in documents that are hidden, password-protected or forbidden, and rows in encrypted notebooks while those notebooks are unlocked. The database identifier required is published in the DOM of pages the reader is entitled to view, so no enumeration or guessing is involved. The substring matching across all columns lets a caller confirm specific content without retrieving whole rows.

Confidentiality only, with no integrity or availability impact.

Suggested fix

Add CheckReadonly at router line 535, matching lines 536, 540 and 541. If read-only roles are meant to use this endpoint, apply CheckAttributeViewBlockAccessableByPublishAccess and FilterAttributeViewByPublishAccess inside the handler as renderAttributeView does, and add the isEncryptedNotebookDeniedForPublish check that the block, ref, outline, search and filetree paths already carry.

More generally, the attribute-view routes now split between middleware-gated and in-body-gated, and a new route defaults to neither. A registration-time convention, where any new /api/av/ route is CheckReadonly unless it deliberately implements in-body filtering, would prevent this recurring.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
>= 0.0.0-20260726161145-9b8e8956f997, < 0.0.0-20260812083335-251596fc0de2
0.0.0-20260812083335-251596fc0de2

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 → 0.0.0-20260812083335-251596fc0de2

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260812083335-251596fc0de2 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

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

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy 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-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
GHSA-c8r8-95hg-mp34
SiYuan: MCP file tool's blocklist is incomplete relative to the HTTP file API it claims to align with, exposing publish-mode passwords and other sensitive workspace files
Medium Also affects github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
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