Skip to content

GHSA-p4qw-vx5p-g984 CVE-2026-73049

SiYuan: The publish filter for database backlinks consults the forbidden list instead of the visibility list, disclosing hidden-tier documents to anonymous readers

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 25.57% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization
Fix
0.0.0-20260730150429-5b42614311b0
Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to this version or later

Description

Summary

/api/av/getAttributeViewBacklinks filters its results for reader roles through FilterAttributeViewBacklinksByPublishAccess. That function resolves its ignore list with GetDisablePublishAccess, which covers only the forbidden tier. Documents at the hidden tier are absent from that list, so they pass the check.

The result is that an anonymous reader supplying a publicly visible database row receives the database name, row title and document path of rows in hidden documents that reference it.

The rest of the function is correct. It takes *gin.Context and calls GetPathPasswordByPublishAccess and CheckPublishAuthCookie at all four decision points, so the password-protected and private tiers are properly enforced. The defect is the choice of list, on one line.

Details

Route, kernel/api/router.go:545 on the development branch and :527 on master:

ginServer.Handle("POST", "/api/av/getAttributeViewBacklinks", model.CheckAuth, getAttributeViewBacklinks)

CheckAuth only. No CheckAdminRole, no CheckReadonly.

The defect. In FilterAttributeViewBacklinksByPublishAccess (kernel/model/publish_access.go:1060 on dev, :435 on master):

publishIgnore := GetDisablePublishAccess(publishAccess)

GetDisablePublishAccess returns only entries at the forbidden tier. A hidden document has visible:false, password:"", disable:false, so it does not appear in that list. CheckPathAccessableByPublishIgnore therefore returns true for it, and because the password is empty the authentication branch short-circuits. Hidden documents pass both halves of the check.

The sibling filter uses the correct list. The regular backlink panel is the same product feature in the same UI, and it is gated properly. kernel/api/ref.go:170 getBacklink2 calls FilterPathsByPublishAccess, which at kernel/model/publish_access.go:1256 resolves its list with GetInvisiblePublishAccess. Two backlink filters in the same file, opposite list choices.

The distinction the tiers are meant to draw. The shipped description of the hidden tier, from app/appearance/langs/en.json:

publishAccessHiddenComment = "Not publicly visible, can be accessed directly."

A direct-access endpoint using the forbidden list is consistent with that: hidden documents are meant to be reachable when the caller already knows the identifier. Backlink discovery is not direct access. The caller supplies the target row and receives the identities of referring rows it never named, which is enumeration, and enumeration is precisely what "not publicly visible" excludes.

Origin. The filter was introduced by 6da2c736e (2026-07-18, "Show database relation backlinks in the attribute panel", #10599) with this list choice from the start. No security-focused commit has touched the attribute-view backlink path since.

What is returned. Per matched backlink: AvName (the database name), Title (the row title), DatabasePath (the HPath of the containing document), BoxID, DatabaseBlockID, and Relations[].KeyName. These are author-written names and titles, not opaque identifiers.

Proof of Concept

Publish mode enabled, Publish.Auth.Enable false, anonymous client with no credentials or cookies. Document A is public and holds a database with a row. Document B is set to varying tiers and holds a database whose relation field points at A's row. The attacker needs only A's avID and itemID, both present in the DOM of A's own published page.

Listing control first, establishing that the platform agrees B must not be listed:

POST /api/filetree/listDocsByPath
→ returns only the public document

Then the same backlinks request at four tier settings, spaced to clear the 30-second GetPublishAccess() cache:

Tier of document B Result
Hidden (visible:false, no password, disable:false) total:1, with avName, title, databasePath and relations[].keyName for the row in B
Forbidden (disable:true) total:0
Private (password set) total:0
Hidden again (restored) total:1, reproducible

The forbidden row confirms that the disable list is what the filter consults. The private row confirms that the password half works correctly. The gap is the hidden tier alone.

POST /api/av/getAttributeViewBacklinks
{"avID":"<public database id>","itemID":"<public row id>"}

→ 200, total:1, disclosing the database name, row title and document path
       of a document the same session cannot list

Impact

An anonymous reader in publish mode, or any publish RoleReader, discovers that a hidden document contains a database row referencing a public one, and receives that row's title, its database's name, and the containing document's path. Names and titles are author-written and routinely describe their subject, so this discloses both the existence and the topic of documents the author marked as not publicly visible.

The reader does not need to know anything about the hidden document beforehand. The only input is a public row identifier taken from a page they are already entitled to view.

Confidentiality only, with no integrity or availability impact. No document body content is returned.

Suggested fix

Change the list resolution in FilterAttributeViewBacklinksByPublishAccess to GetInvisiblePublishAccess, mirroring FilterPathsByPublishAccess on the regular backlink path. The password handling in the function is already correct and needs no change.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel
< 0.0.0-20260730150429-5b42614311b0
0.0.0-20260730150429-5b42614311b0

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 → 0.0.0-20260730150429-5b42614311b0

go
go get github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel@v0.0.0-20260730150429-5b42614311b0 && 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