Skip to content

GHSA-mp7r-57w4-5qm3 CVE-2026-72792 GO-2026-6427

SiYuan: Tag labels from password-protected documents are returned to readers who have not entered the password

Medium Go
Severity
6.9 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.33%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 25.58% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
0.0.0-20260726002639-4515fa257cfa
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

CVE: This vulnerability corresponds to CVE-2026-72792.

Summary

/api/tag/getTag filters its results for reader roles through FilterTagsByPublishIgnore, which checks only the visible publish tier. Documents that are published but password-protected pass that check, so a reader who has never entered a document's publish password receives every tag label used inside it, together with occurrence counts.

The project has already treated this exact tier mismatch as a vulnerability on a sibling path: commit 82e9ded42 ("Enforce publish access for graph nodes") moved the graph endpoint off the visible-only filter and onto a password-aware one. FilterTagsByPublishIgnore was not upgraded alongside it.

Details

Item Detail
Route kernel/api/router.go:194 POST /api/tag/getTag → model.CheckAuth → getTag
Middleware CheckAuth only: no CheckReadonly, no CheckAdminRole
Guard Present but at the wrong tier: visible-only, no password check
Exposed Every tag label (#label# text) and its occurrence count inside password-protected but visible documents

The tier mismatch. For reader roles, getTag filters via:

publishIgnore := GetInvisiblePublishAccess(publishAccess)
tags = FilterTagsByPublishIgnore(publishIgnore, tags)

FilterTagsByPublishIgnore counts a label if CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore(span.Box, span.Path, publishIgnore) holds, then reads label := util.UnescapeHTML(span.Content).

CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore (kernel/model/publish_access.go:183) consults the invisible set only. It returns true for any visible document, including one carrying a publish password. The project's complete gate is checkBlockTreeAccessableByPublishAccess (kernel/model/publish_access.go:225), which ANDs that same visibility test with password == "" || CheckPublishAuthCookie(...). The tag filter implements the first half and omits the second.

The disclosed value is user-authored content, not a structural identifier: span.Content is the tag text an author wrote inside the document project codenames, personal names, client names, subject matter and the accompanying count reveals how heavily each appears.

Established as a defect by the project's own remediation. Commit 82e9ded42 replaced the graph endpoint's visible-only FilterGraphByPublishIgnore with a filter that additionally resolves the document's publish password and validates CheckPublishAuthCookie. The reasoning that motivated that change applies unchanged here: same input shape, same visible-only body, same class of leaked material. FilterTagsByPublishIgnore retains the pre-fix pattern.

Verified unfixed. At v3.7.4-alpha.1, getTag still calls FilterTagsByPublishIgnore, and that function's body still tests only CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore. No commit on the development branch touches kernel/api/tag.go or the tag filter (git log and git log -S both empty over that range).

Scope note on the remaining visible-only call sites. Two further consumers of the *ByPublishIgnore tier were reviewed and are not claimed as vulnerabilities in this report: listDocsByPath (kernel/model/filetree.go:1160), which exposes document titles and is plausibly intentional for navigation, and the identifier-only filter, which returns no authored content. They are noted because the visible-only tier is now a repeated source of defects, and an audit of every *ByPublishIgnore call site is the durable remedy rather than a third individual patch.

Proof of Concept

Precondition: publish mode enabled (default port 6808); a published document that carries a publish password and contains at least one tag; a reader session that has not authenticated to that document.

POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/tag/getTag
{}

→ 200
   The returned tag tree includes labels sourced from the password-protected
   document, with counts, despite the session holding no publish auth cookie
   for it.

Differential check: request the document itself through a password-gated endpoint with the same session and observe that access is refused, while its tag labels remain present in the getTag response.

Impact

An anonymous reader in publish mode or any publish RoleReader enumerates the tag vocabulary of documents they are not authorized to open, along with usage counts. Tags are author-written free text, so this discloses subject matter, names and internal terminology from documents whose contents the publish password was configured to protect. Confidentiality-only.

Suggested fix

Replace FilterTagsByPublishIgnore with a password-aware filter mirroring the one introduced in 82e9ded42 for graph nodes: resolve each span's document password via GetPathPasswordByPublishAccess and require CheckPublishAuthCookie before the label is counted, in addition to the existing visibility test. More durably, audit every remaining *ByPublishIgnore call site against checkBlockTreeAccessableByPublishAccess the visible-only tier has now produced this defect on at least two separate endpoints.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260726002639-4515fa257cfa
0.0.0-20260726002639-4515fa257cfa

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 → 0.0.0-20260726002639-4515fa257cfa

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260726002639-4515fa257cfa && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 6.9

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

CVSS 3.1 5.8

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

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

Weakness

CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

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-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