VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2026Updated 25 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-33194: siyuan · Path Traversal

Affects siyuanSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.8 Medium : upgrade to 3.6.2 when convenient.

Data as of 1 Nov 2026, 22:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.8Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.6.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 1 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade siyuan and siyuan-note/siyuan to 3.6.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
siyuan-notesiyuan	Affected <3.6.2	Fixed in 3.6.2
GitHubsiyuan-note/siyuan`pkg:github/siyuan-note/siyuan`Other threats	Affected <3.6.2	Fixed in 3.6.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-33194, organizations should upgrade SiYuan Note to version 3.6.2 or later, where the path traversal issue has been addressed with a more comprehensive denylist in the IsSensitivePath() function. Until upgrade is possible, restrict access to the globalCopyFiles and importStdMd endpoints to only fully trusted users and monitor usage for suspicious activity. Implement strict access controls and auditing on the underlying Linux filesystem to detect unauthorized file access attempts. Consider deploying application-layer firewalls or runtime application self-protection (RASP) solutions to detect and block path traversal attempts. Review and harden user privilege assignments to minimize the number of users with high privileges required to exploit this vulnerability. Additionally, conduct regular security assessments and code reviews of custom plugins or extensions that interact with file paths to ensure they do not introduce similar weaknesses. Finally, educate users and administrators about the risks of path traversal and the importance of applying security patches promptly.

Description

SiYuan is a personal knowledge management system. Prior to version 3.6.2, the `IsSensitivePath()` function in `kernel/util/path.go` uses a denylist approach that was recently expanded (GHSA-h5vh-m7fg-w5h6, commit 9914fd1) but remains incomplete. Multiple security-relevant Linux directories are not blocked, including `/opt` (application data), `/usr` (local configs/binaries), `/home` (other users), `/mnt` and `/media` (mounted volumes). The `globalCopyFiles` and `importStdMd` endpoints rely on `IsSensitivePath` as their primary defense against reading files outside the workspace. Version 3.6.2 contains an updated fix.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-33194 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information due to improper path traversal protections. Attackers with authenticated high privileges can read files outside the intended workspace, potentially accessing configuration files, user data, application secrets, or mounted volumes that may contain sensitive information. This can lead to privacy violations, leakage of credentials or keys, and exposure of intellectual property. Although the vulnerability does not allow modification or deletion of files, the confidentiality breach alone can have serious consequences for organizations relying on SiYuan Note for knowledge management. The scope of affected systems is limited to those running vulnerable versions of SiYuan Note on Linux environments. Organizations with sensitive data stored or processed within SiYuan Note are at risk, especially if the application is used in multi-user or shared environments. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for targeted attacks. Overall, the vulnerability poses a moderate risk to confidentiality with no direct impact on integrity or availability.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (Path Traversal) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
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.
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…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/security/advisories/GHSA-vm69-h85x-8p85 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Mar 2026, 21:12 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats