VulnerabilityPublished 12 Aug 2026Updated 14 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-72796: siyuan · Missing 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 29% 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 11 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 3.7.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
siyuan-notesiyuan	Affected <3.7.4	Fixed in 3.7.4
GitHubsiyuan-note/siyuan`pkg:github/siyuan-note/siyuan`Other threats	Affected <3.7.4	Fixed in 3.7.4

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

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, restricting anonymous access and limiting publish reader tokens may reduce exposure risk.

Description

**CVE:** This vulnerability corresponds to [CVE-2026-72796](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-72796). ### Summary Several static-file routes in the server mux (`kernel/server/serve.go`) are registered with `CheckAuth` only and serve directories directly, without the publish-access checks, sensitive-path blocklist, or `refuseToAccess` rules that the REST API applies to the same data. They are therefore reachable by the publish `RoleReader` token and by the anonymous account when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`. Most notably, `/templates/` serves `data/templates` a directory the REST file API explicitly refuses to serve to non-administrators. ### Details | Route | Registration | Guard | Exposed to a reader | |---|---|---|---| | `/templates/*` (line 424) | `Group("/templates/", model.CheckAuth).Static("", data/templates)` | none beyond path cleaning | the templates directory | | `/snippets/*` (line 434) | `CheckAuth` | blocks only `conf.json` | any snippet's JS/CSS content by name | | `/widgets/`, `/plugins/`, `/emojis/` (409/414/419) | `Group(CheckAuth).Static(dir)` | none | whole directory trees | | `/export/*` (line 320) | `Group("/export/", CheckAuth)` | traversal, sensitive-path and DEK guards: **no publish check** | export artifacts (PDF/HTML/DOCX/CSV) | **`/templates/` directly contradicts an existing control.** The REST file path runs `refuseToAccess` (`kernel/api/file.go:551-553`), which explicitly returns 403 for `data/templates/` to non-administrators the project has already decided readers must not read templates. The `/templates/` static route serves that same directory to any `RoleReader`, with no `IsSensitivePath` check, no publish-access check, and no `refuseToAccess`. Templates are user-authored Markdown documents containing template/Sprig syntax and are not covered by publish-access controls. `gin`'s `.Static` disables directory listing, so a filename is required but the contradiction with `refuseToAccess` is the defect. **`/export/` versus `/assets/`.** `/assets/*path` (line 692) correctly gates non-administrators via `CheckAbsPathAccessableByPublishAccess`, plus `IsSensitivePath` and encrypted-asset handling. `/export/` carries traversal, sensitive-path and DEK guards but no publish-access check, so a reader can retrieve export artifacts of arbitrary documents, including private ones. Artifact naming is mixed, some use a random export ID, but code and CSV exports use the document name (`export/code/<name>`, `export/csv/<name>/<name>.csv`), which a reader can derive from `listDocsByPath` titles while the artifact exists. This path is therefore conditional. **Confirmed correctly gated, for contrast:** `/assets/*` (publish-gated), `/history/*` and `/repo/diff/*` (`CheckAdminRole`), `/debug/pprof/*` (disabled in production builds), `/public/` (intentionally public). All four routes above were verified to carry `CheckAuth` only, no `CheckReadonly`, no `CheckAdminRole`. ### Proof of Concept Precondition: publish mode enabled (default port 6808), anonymous when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`, otherwise any publish reader account. **Templates: served despite the REST API refusing them:** ``` GET http://127.0.0.1:6808/templates/<template-file>.md → 200, template content ``` The equivalent REST request is refused: ``` POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/file/getFile {"path":"data/templates/<template-file>.md"} → 403 (refuseToAccess) ``` The same reader session obtains the file through the static route. **Snippets:** ``` GET http://127.0.0.1:6808/snippets/<snippet-name>.js → 200, snippet source ``` **Export artifacts (conditional on a predictable name while the artifact exists):** ``` GET http://127.0.0.1:6808/export/csv/<doc-name>/<doc-name>.csv → 200, exported content of a document the reader has no publish access to ``` ### Impact An anonymous reader (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish `RoleReader` can read user-authored template documents that the REST API explicitly withholds from non-administrators, snippet source (JS/CSS), and the contents of the widgets, plugins and emoji directories. Where an export artifact exists under a derivable name, they can additionally retrieve exported content of documents outside their publish scope. Confidentiality-only. ### Suggested fix Apply the same treatment these routes' REST counterparts already receive: for non-administrator roles, enforce publish-access scoping plus `IsSensitivePath` and the `refuseToAccess` blocklist on the static routes, mirroring `/assets/*`. Alternatively, block `/templates/`, non-public `/snippets/`, and `/export/` for reader roles entirely.

Impact

The vulnerability allows unauthorized users to read protected content that should be restricted by publish-access controls. This can lead to exposure of templates, snippets, and export artifacts, potentially leaking sensitive or proprietary information. There is no indication of privilege escalation or modification capabilities, so the impact is limited to unauthorized data disclosure.

Summary

CVE-2026-72796 describes an access control bypass in SiYuan note-taking software prior to version 3.7.4. The vulnerability arises because static-file routes in the server mux bypass the publish-access controls that are enforced on the REST API endpoints. As a result, attackers possessing publish reader tokens or operating in disabled-auth mode with anonymous access can directly access static routes to read sensitive content such as templates, snippets, and export artifacts. This bypass compromises confidentiality by exposing data that should be restricted by access controls.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Aug 2026, 19:44 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats