Skip to content

GHSA-mw8r-mw84-88v2 CVE-2026-72810 GO-2026-6400

SiYuan: Publish-boundary bypass via WebSocket broadcast: anonymous readers receive a live unfiltered feed of all edits including protected/forbidden documents (publish mode)

Critical Go
Severity
9.2 / 10
Critical · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.54%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 45.30% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-862 Missing Authorization
Fix
0.0.0-20260723013612-ba948639d7f6
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

CVE: This vulnerability corresponds to CVE-2026-72810.

Summary

WebSocket sessions established through the publish surface (port 6808, RoleReader anonymous when Publish.Auth.Enable is false) are added to the same broadcast session pool as authenticated sessions. The kernel's broadcast functions push content events transactions carrying block DOM, document save/create, move/rename to every session in the pool with no role or publish-access filtering. As a result, an anonymous reader who holds a WebSocket connection open passively receives a real-time feed of every edit made in the workspace, including edits to password-protected, publish-forbidden, and unpublished documents. Because these events are delivered over the push channel and never pass through an HTTP handler, none of the publish-access filters that gate the HTTP endpoints apply.

Details

Session admission. HandleConnect admits the injected RoleReader publish token, and the session is registered via AddPushChan into the same sessions pool used for authenticated clients.

Unfiltered broadcast. The broadcast functions (Broadcast, broadcastOthers, broadcastOtherAppMains, …) write to every session in the pool with no role or publish-access check. The isPublish flag on a session is consulted only to send the "service closed" notice it is never used to gate content. Content events are pushed via PushModeBroadcast → Broadcast(), so transactions (with rendered block DOM), savedoc/create, and moveDoc/rename events reach the publish reader's socket unfiltered.

No HTTP filter applies. This is a push channel, the events originate from the kernel's own edit pipeline and are broadcast directly to open sockets. They never traverse an HTTP handler, so the publish-access filters that gate the HTTP content endpoints (and the incomplete/missing filters reported separately on those endpoints) are not in the path at all. The WebSocket route (/ws) is CheckAuth-only, which the publish RoleReader token satisfies.

Proof of Concept

Reproduced on a local instance (SiYuan running locally, publish mode enabled on port 6808, publish Basic Auth disabled). An anonymous client (no token, no password) opens wss://127.0.0.1:6808/ws and holds it open while an administrator edits documents in the workspace.

The anonymous socket received, in real time and unfiltered:

  • updateAttrs with name=WS_LEAK_SECRET_9931 on a block whose rootID is a password-protected document.
  • The secret title WS_SECRET_DOC_7742 of a newly created document.
  • The create event carrying the notebook (box) name CritChain and the document path.

No HTTP request was made beyond the WebSocket upgrade; the content arrived over the push channel.

Impact

An anonymous reader (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish RoleReader who merely holds a WebSocket connection open receives a live feed of every edit an administrator makes: block DOM, attributes, titles, notebook names, and document structure, including for password-protected, publish-forbidden, and unpublished documents. This defeats the publish-access and publish-password boundaries entirely for any content edited while the socket is open. The precondition is trivial: an administrator active in the workspace while the anonymous socket is connected. Confidentiality-only (passive disclosure); the channel is receive-only for the reader. Encrypted-notebook content follows the same broadcast path if edited while unlocked.

Suggested fix

Filter broadcasts by session before writing: for any session flagged isPublish, apply the same publish-access/publish-ignore/publish-password checks used on the HTTP content path before pushing a content event, or exclude publish sessions from content broadcasts entirely and deliver only the events a publish viewer is authorized to see. The isPublish flag is already present on the session; it should gate content, not only the service-closed notice.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260723013612-ba948639d7f6
0.0.0-20260723013612-ba948639d7f6

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 → 0.0.0-20260723013612-ba948639d7f6

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260723013612-ba948639d7f6 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 9.2

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

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-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