Skip to content

GHSA-fph3-ghq9-vw66 CVE-2026-69083 GO-2026-6374

SiYuan: Unauthenticated SQL execution and REGEXP injection via fullTextSearchAssetContent (publish mode): reader-reachable raw SQL (method 2) and unescaped REGEXP (method 3) on read-write asset-content DB

Critical Go
Severity
9.9 / 10
Critical · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.47%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 41.08% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Fix
0.0.0-20260721004815-cf42dd5680c8
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

CVE: This vulnerability corresponds to CVE-2026-69083.

Summary

The /api/search/fullTextSearchAssetContent endpoint exposes two SQL flaws on the asset-content database, both reachable by the publish RoleReader token and by the anonymous account when Publish.Auth.Enable is false:

  1. method 2 passes a client-supplied SQL statement to the read-write asset-content DB with no single-statement or read-only guard, and without the admin restriction its sibling fullTextSearchBlock applies to the same SQL method.
  2. method 3 builds a REGEXP clause by concatenating the client expression with no quote-escaping, permitting SQL breakout while the equivalent block-search builder does escape.

Both run on a read-write handle through a statement-stacking-capable driver, spanning the cross-notebook asset-content store.

Details

Route / auth tier. router.go: Handle("POST", "/api/search/fullTextSearchAssetContent", model.CheckAuth, fullTextSearchAssetContent), CheckAuth only. Anonymous/reader reachable on the publish surface. parseSearchAssetContentArgs reads method and query straight from the JSON body with no constraint, so both are fully client-controlled.

Missing admin guard (contrast with the sibling). fullTextSearchBlock rejects the SQL method for non-admins (if method == 2 && !IsAdminRoleContext(c)). fullTextSearchAssetContent has no such check on its handler, so the SQL method is reachable by a reader.

method 2 : raw SQL, no statement guard. Dispatch: FullTextSearchAssetContent case 2 → searchAssetContentBySQL(query, …). After filterQueryInvisibleChars + TrimSpace, the statement is passed to sql.SelectAssetContentsRawStmt(stmt, …) → queryAssetContent → assetContentDB.Query(query) directly, with no CheckSingleStatement/CheckReadonlyStatement. The assetContentDB DSN sets no mode=ro/_query_only, so the handle is read-write (same 88250/go-sqlite3 fork).

method 3 : unescaped REGEXP concatenation. Dispatch → assetContentFieldRegexp(exp), which writes (name REGEXP '<exp>' OR content REGEXP '<exp>') by concatenation with no ' escaping. exp reaches it after only filterQueryInvisibleChars (strips invisible characters, not quotes). The parallel block-search builder fieldRegexp performs ReplaceAll(regexp, "'", "''") before wrapping, this asset builder omits that step. A single quote in exp breaks out of the literal into SQL context. The result runs via SelectAssetContentsRawStmtNoParse → queryAssetContent → direct assetContentDB.Query, again with no single/read-only guard.

Post-hoc filter. FilterAssetContentByPublishAccess runs on the results after the query executes; it filters rows and does not constrain the statement (same timing as the accepted searchDocs/searchEmbedBlock findings).

Handle / stacking / scope. Read-write asset-content DB, 88250/go-sqlite3 stacking-capable driver, ATTACH available. The asset-content store spans notebooks cross-boundary.

Impact

An unauthenticated request (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish RoleReader can, via method 2, execute arbitrary SQL on the read-write asset-content database, and via method 3, inject SQL through the unescaped REGEXP clause. Both permit cross-notebook read disclosure of asset-content data and, via the read-write handle and statement stacking, modification of database content and ATTACH-reachable files. No admin role or write permission through the normal API is required. Code execution is not reachable in the default build (no load_extension).

PoC Steps

  1. Create a doc with a heading and secret body (6806, admin token)

curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/notebook/createNotebook -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"name\":\"F3\"}" Take the returned notebook id as BOX, then: curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/filetree/createDocWithMd -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"notebook\":\"BOX\",\"path\":\"/f3-secret\",\"markdown\":\"## SecretSection\n\nUNIQUE_MARKER_99 hidden body text\"}" The returned string is the doc root id → DOC.

  1. Get the heading block id (admin SQL on 68

curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/notebook/createNotebook -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"name\":\"F3\"}" Take the returned notebook id as BOX, then: curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/fintent-Type: application/json" -H"Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"notebook\":\"BOX\",\"path\":\"/f3-secret\",\"markdown\":\"## SecretSection\n\nUNIQUE_MARKER_99 hidden body text\"}" The returned string is the doc root id → DOC.

  1. Get the heading block id (admin SQL on 6806)

curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/query/sql -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"stmt\":\"SELECT id,type,content FROM blocks WHERE type='h'\"}" Copy the id whose content is SecretSection → HEADING.

  1. Mark the doc forbidden from publishing (admin)

curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/filetree/setPublishAccess -H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "Authorization: Token g4wj3r04ntobe9m4" -d "{\"id\":\"DOC\",\"visible\":false,\"password\":\"\",\"disable\":true}" Now the doc is explicitly excluded from the

  1. Baseline: the admin-gated sibling refuses the reader

curl -i -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockDOM -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d "{\"id\":\"HEADING\"}" → expect 403 (getBlockDOM is CheckAdminRole). This is how raw-DOM retrieval is supposed to be gated.

  1. THE PROOF: reader pulls the forbidden doc's content anyway

curl -i -X POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getHeadingChildrenDOM -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d "{\"id\":\"HEADING\"}" → 200 status code and data contains the rendered HTML including UNIQUE_MARKER_99 hidden body text full content of a doc that is disabled from publishing, returned to an anonymous reader with no filter.

Suggested fix

Bring fullTextSearchAssetContent in line with its block-search twin: apply the method == 2 && !IsAdminRoleContext rejection, route the raw-SQL path through CheckSingleStatement/CheckReadonlyStatement, and add ReplaceAll(exp, "'", "''") in assetContentFieldRegexp to match fieldRegexp. Ideally run reader-reachable asset-content reads on a _query_only=1 handle so no reader-reachable path can write or ATTACH.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260721004815-cf42dd5680c8
0.0.0-20260721004815-cf42dd5680c8

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 → 0.0.0-20260721004815-cf42dd5680c8

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260721004815-cf42dd5680c8 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 9.9

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
High
Integrity (subsequent systems)
High
Availability (subsequent systems)
None
Exploit maturity
Not defined
Scope
X

CVSS 3.1 10.0

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

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

Weakness

CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')

The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.

How to prevent it
  • 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 [REF-1482]. For example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL injection if used properly.
  • Architecture and Design: If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated. Process SQL queries using prepared statements, parameterized queries, or stored procedures. These features should accept parameters or variables and support strong typing. Do not dynamically construct and execute query strings within these features using "exec" or similar functionality, since this may re-introduce the possibility of SQL injection. [REF-867]
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations. Specifically, follow the principle of least privilege when creating user accounts to a SQL database. The database users should only have the minimum privileges necessary to use their account. If the requirements of the system indicate that a user can read and modify their own data, then limit their privileges so they cannot read/write others' data. Use the strictest permissions possible on all database objects, such as execute-only for stored procedures.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88). Instead of building a new implementation, such features may be available in the database or programming language. For example, the Oracle DBMS_ASSERT package can check or enforce that parameters have certain properties that make them less vulnerable to SQL injection. For MySQL, the mysql_real_escape_string() API function is available in both C and PHP.
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When constructing SQL query strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping. Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing SQL injection, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent SQL injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, the name "O'Reilly" would likely pass the validation step, since it is a common last name in the English language. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the data
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
  • Implementation: Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success. If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files. Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not. In the context of SQL Injection, error messages revealing the structure of a SQL query can help attackers tailor successful attack strings.
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481.
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

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-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
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