VulnerabilityPublished 12 Aug 2026Updated 14 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-72792: siyuan · Incorrect Authorization

Affects siyuanSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 3.7.4 when convenient.

Data as of 11 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.7.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: Low
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Subsequent System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 12 Aug 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 12 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 to 3.7.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
siyuan-notesiyuan	Affected <3.7.4	Fixed in 3.7.4

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, restricting access to the affected endpoint or implementing additional access controls may reduce exposure.

Description

**CVE:** This vulnerability corresponds to [CVE-2026-72792](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/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: ```go 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

Impact

Attackers can gain unauthorized access to metadata (tag labels and counts) from password-protected documents, potentially revealing sensitive internal terminology or organizational vocabulary. However, the vulnerability does not disclose document content itself, limiting the impact to information disclosure of tags only.

Summary

CVE-2026-72792 describes an incorrect authorization vulnerability in SiYuan note-taking software prior to version 3.7.4. The /api/tag/getTag endpoint improperly exposes tag labels and their occurrence counts from password-protected documents to unauthenticated users. This allows attackers to enumerate tags and internal terminology without needing the document's publish password, leading to partial information disclosure.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Aug 2026, 19:57 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats