CVE-2026-40259

SiYuan is an open-source personal knowledge management system. In versions 3.6.3 and below, the /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView endpoint is protected only by generic authentication that accepts publish-service RoleReader tokens. The handler passes a caller-controlled id directly to a model function that unconditionally deletes the corresponding attribute view file from the workspace without verifying that the caller has write privileges or that the target attribute view is actually unused. An authenticated publish-service reader can permanently delete arbitrary attribute view definitions by extracting publicly exposed data-av-id values from published content, causing breakage of database views and workspace rendering until manually restored. This issue has been fixed in version 3.6.4.

SiYuan is an open-source personal knowledge management system. In versions 3.6.3 and below, the /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView endpoint is protected only by generic authentication that accepts publish-service RoleReader tokens. The handler passes a caller-controlled id directly to a model function that unconditionally deletes the corresponding attribute view file from the workspace without verifying that the caller has write privileges or that the target attribute view is actually unused. An authenticated publish-service reader can permanently delete arbitrary attribute view definitions by extracting publicly exposed data-av-id values from published content, causing breakage of database views and workspace rendering until manually restored. This issue has been fixed in version 3.6.4.

Summary

An authenticated publish-service reader can invoke /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView and cause persistent deletion of arbitrary attribute view (AV) definition files from the workspace.

The route is protected only by generic CheckAuth, which accepts publish RoleReader requests. The handler forwards a caller-controlled id directly into a model function that deletes data/storage/av/<id>.json without verifying either:

• that the caller is allowed to perform write/destructive actions; or
• that the target AV is actually unused.

This is a persistent integrity and availability issue reachable from the publish surface.

Root Cause

1. Publish users are issued a RoleReader JWT

• kernel/model/auth.go

ClaimsKeyRole: RoleReader,

2. The publish reverse proxy forwards that token upstream

• kernel/server/proxy/publish.go
• kernel/server/proxy/publish.go

3. CheckAuth accepts RoleReader

• kernel/model/session.go

if role := GetGinContextRole(c); IsValidRole(role, []Role{
    RoleAdministrator,
    RoleEditor,
    RoleReader,
}) {
    c.Next()
    return
}

4. The route is exposed with CheckAuth only

• kernel/api/router.go

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

There is no CheckAdminRole and no CheckReadonly.

5. The handler forwards attacker-controlled id directly to the delete sink

• kernel/api/av.go

avID := arg["id"].(string)
model.RemoveUnusedAttributeView(avID)

6. The model deletes the AV file unconditionally

• kernel/model/attribute_view.go

func RemoveUnusedAttributeView(id string) {
    absPath := filepath.Join(util.DataDir, "storage", "av", id+".json")
    if !filelock.IsExist(absPath) {
        return
    }
    ...
    if err = filelock.RemoveWithoutFatal(absPath); err != nil {
        ...
        return
    }
    IncSync()
}

Crucially, this function does not verify that the supplied AV is actually unused. The name of the function suggests a cleanup helper, but the implementation is really "delete AV file by id if it exists".

Attack Prerequisites

• Publish service enabled
• Attacker can access the publish service
• If publish auth is enabled, attacker has valid publish-reader credentials
• Attacker knows an avID

Obtaining avID

avID is not secret. It is exposed extensively in frontend markup as data-av-id.

Examples:

• app/src/protyle/render/av/render.ts
• app/src/protyle/render/av/layout.ts
• app/src/protyle/render/av/groups.ts

Any publish-visible database/attribute view can therefore disclose a valid avID to the attacker.

Exploit Path

1. Attacker browses published content containing an attribute view.
2. Attacker extracts the data-av-id value from the page/DOM.
3. Attacker sends a POST request to /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView through the publish service.
4. Publish proxy injects a valid RoleReader token.
5. CheckAuth accepts the request.
6. The handler passes the attacker-controlled avID to model.RemoveUnusedAttributeView.
7. The backend deletes data/storage/av/<avID>.json.

Proof of Concept

Request:

POST /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView HTTP/1.1
Host: <publish-host>:<publish-port>
Content-Type: application/json
Authorization: Basic <publish-account-creds-if-enabled>

{
  "id": "<exposed-data-av-id>"
}

Expected result:

• HTTP 200…

SiYuan is an open-source personal knowledge management system. In versions 3.6.3 and below, the /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView endpoint is protected only by generic authentication that accepts publish-service RoleReader tokens. The handler passes a caller-controlled id directly to a model function that unconditionally deletes the corresponding attribute view file from the workspace without verifying that the caller has write privileges or that the target attribute view is actually unused. An authenticated publish-service reader can permanently delete arbitrary attribute view definitions by extracting publicly exposed data-av-id values from published content, causing breakage of database views and workspace rendering until manually restored. This issue has been fixed in version 3.6.4.

SiYuan is an open-source personal knowledge management system. In versions 3.6.3 and below, the /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView endpoint is protected only by generic authentication that accepts publish-service RoleReader tokens. The handler passes a caller-controlled id directly to a model function that unconditionally deletes the corresponding attribute view file from the workspace without verifying that the caller has write privileges or that the target attribute view is actually unused. An authenticated publish-service reader can permanently delete arbitrary attribute view definitions by extracting publicly exposed data-av-id values from published content, causing breakage of database views and workspace rendering until manually restored. This issue has been fixed in version 3.6.4.

Summary

An authenticated publish-service reader can invoke /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView and cause persistent deletion of arbitrary attribute view (AV) definition files from the workspace.

The route is protected only by generic CheckAuth, which accepts publish RoleReader requests. The handler forwards a caller-controlled id directly into a model function that deletes data/storage/av/<id>.json without verifying either:

• that the caller is allowed to perform write/destructive actions; or
• that the target AV is actually unused.

This is a persistent integrity and availability issue reachable from the publish surface.

Root Cause

1. Publish users are issued a RoleReader JWT

• kernel/model/auth.go

ClaimsKeyRole: RoleReader,

2. The publish reverse proxy forwards that token upstream

• kernel/server/proxy/publish.go
• kernel/server/proxy/publish.go

3. CheckAuth accepts RoleReader

• kernel/model/session.go

if role := GetGinContextRole(c); IsValidRole(role, []Role{
    RoleAdministrator,
    RoleEditor,
    RoleReader,
}) {
    c.Next()
    return
}

4. The route is exposed with CheckAuth only

• kernel/api/router.go

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

There is no CheckAdminRole and no CheckReadonly.

5. The handler forwards attacker-controlled id directly to the delete sink

• kernel/api/av.go

avID := arg["id"].(string)
model.RemoveUnusedAttributeView(avID)

6. The model deletes the AV file unconditionally

• kernel/model/attribute_view.go

func RemoveUnusedAttributeView(id string) {
    absPath := filepath.Join(util.DataDir, "storage", "av", id+".json")
    if !filelock.IsExist(absPath) {
        return
    }
    ...
    if err = filelock.RemoveWithoutFatal(absPath); err != nil {
        ...
        return
    }
    IncSync()
}

Crucially, this function does not verify that the supplied AV is actually unused. The name of the function suggests a cleanup helper, but the implementation is really "delete AV file by id if it exists".

Attack Prerequisites

• Publish service enabled
• Attacker can access the publish service
• If publish auth is enabled, attacker has valid publish-reader credentials
• Attacker knows an avID

Obtaining avID

avID is not secret. It is exposed extensively in frontend markup as data-av-id.

Examples:

• app/src/protyle/render/av/render.ts
• app/src/protyle/render/av/layout.ts
• app/src/protyle/render/av/groups.ts

Any publish-visible database/attribute view can therefore disclose a valid avID to the attacker.

Exploit Path

1. Attacker browses published content containing an attribute view.
2. Attacker extracts the data-av-id value from the page/DOM.
3. Attacker sends a POST request to /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView through the publish service.
4. Publish proxy injects a valid RoleReader token.
5. CheckAuth accepts the request.
6. The handler passes the attacker-controlled avID to model.RemoveUnusedAttributeView.
7. The backend deletes data/storage/av/<avID>.json.

Proof of Concept

Request:

POST /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView HTTP/1.1
Host: <publish-host>:<publish-port>
Content-Type: application/json
Authorization: Basic <publish-account-creds-if-enabled>

{
  "id": "<exposed-data-av-id>"
}

Expected result:

• HTTP 200…

SiYuan: Publish Reader Can Arbitrarily Delete Attribute View Files via /api/av/removeUnusedAttributeView in github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel

This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:

• Update to version 0.0.20260723T184607 2026-07-23T18:46:07Z (jsc#PED-11136).

Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:

• GO-2026-4730 CVE-2026-33022 GHSA-cv4x-93xx-wgfj
• GO-2026-4761 CVE-2026-33211 GHSA-j5q5-j9gm-2w5c
• GO-2026-5102 CVE-2026-45021 GHSA-3vcp-chfh-f6r2
• GO-2026-5272 CVE-2026-40938 GHSA-94jr-7pqp-xhcq
• GO-2026-5486 CVE-2026-40924 GHSA-m2cx-gpqf-qf74
• GO-2026-5542 CVE-2026-40090 GHSA-pj97-4p9w-gx3q
• GO-2026-5630 CVE-2026-25542 GHSA-rmx9-2pp3-xhcr
• GO-2026-5643 CVE-2026-40923 GHSA-rx35-6rhx-7858
• GO-2026-5675 CVE-2026-41492 GHSA-vvf7-6rmr-m29q
• GO-2026-5711 CVE-2026-40161 GHSA-wjxp-xrpv-xpff
• GO-2026-5746 CVE-2026-41567 GHSA-x86f-5xw2-fm2r
• GO-2026-5749 CVE-2026-41328 GHSA-x92x-px7w-4gx4
• GO-2026-5837 CVE-2026-44840 GHSA-q2m9-6jp9-c6mc
• GO-2026-5929 CVE-2026-44342 GHSA-26v7-h57m-gh9m
• GO-2026-5930 CVE-2026-33655 GHSA-6qcr-qxgr-m7fv
• GO-2026-5933 GHSA-3g4q-2f67-2gvh
• GO-2026-5934 GHSA-59qp-cfj3-rp64
• GO-2026-5935 GHSA-7856-g3gv-9wq8
• GO-2026-5936 CVE-2026-53552 GHSA-26rh-24rg-j3vv
• GO-2026-5937 CVE-2026-53508 GHSA-2jcc-mxv7-p3f9
• GO-2026-5938 CVE-2026-53553 GHSA-4g5x-hcwm-82jw
• GO-2026-5939 CVE-2026-10517 GHSA-698x-9w2p-7vvp
• GO-2026-5940 CVE-2026-53572 GHSA-6w3m-4hhp-775q
• GO-2026-5941 CVE-2026-53487 GHSA-gvhc-wv3v-7pf8
• GO-2026-5942 CVE-2026-46600
• GO-2026-5944 CVE-2026-50197 GHSA-659f-rgp5-w4wf
• GO-2026-5945 CVE-2026-6815 GHSA-rmxx-v9rj-vpvg
• GO-2026-5946 CVE-2026-52831 GHSA-v5px-423j-pf7p
• GO-2026-5947 CVE-2026-53649 GHSA-xqhv-chqm-fhcc
• GO-2026-5948 CVE-2026-50554 GHSA-588f-fvcv-xhvf
• GO-2026-5949 CVE-2026-50553 GHSA-rqrh-8wpv-x7hh
• GO-2026-5950 CVE-2026-53602 GHSA-339v-266x-79xr
• GO-2026-5951 CVE-2026-10219 GHSA-6jm8-4fhr-5w64
• GO-2026-5952 CVE-2026-49834 GHSA-9vcr-p3rj-q5q6
• GO-2026-5953 CVE-2026-9094 GHSA-c9w5-qp6m-m395
• GO-2026-5956 CVE-2026-55252 GHSA-h5g6-xmh4-hc37
• GO-2026-5957 CVE-2026-54158 GHSA-5xfx-xj4h-5p7r
• GO-2026-5958 CVE-2026-54068 GHSA-gcm7-57gf-953c
• GO-2026-5959 CVE-2026-54072 GHSA-h29v-hj44-q8cv
• GO-2026-5961 CVE-2026-54069 GHSA-hvr9-72v2-fff3
• GO-2026-5962 CVE-2026-54088 GHSA-m93h-4hw7-5qcm
• GO-2026-5963 CVE-2026-54067 GHSA-mvjr-vv3c-w4qv
• GO-2026-5964 CVE-2026-54066 GHSA-p4m3-mgmm-c664
• GO-2026-5965 CVE-2026-54070 GHSA-w7cg-whh7-xp28
• GO-2026-5966 CVE-2026-54089 GHSA-xqp3-jq6g-x3qm
• GO-2026-5967 CVE-2026-50551 GHSA-56mp-4f3v-fgj2
• GO-2026-5968 CVE-2026-54174 GHSA-fpg8-7664-jc5q
• GO-2026-5969 GHSA-g936-7jqj-mwv8
• GO-2026-5970 CVE-2026-56852
• GO-2026-5973 CVE-2026-54250 GHSA-jxr7-mqhw-9p98
• GO-2026-5974 CVE-2026-44300 GHSA-wmj8-9953-vff5
• GO-2026-5975 CVE-2026-50018 GHSA-42j2-w334-qxw7
• GO-2026-5976 CVE-2026-50141 GHSA-g7mm-9vx7-jm7h
• GO-2026-5977 CVE-2026-50013 GHSA-qrh4-p6v4-mrfg
• GO-2026-5978 CVE-2026-50125 GHSA-qw5r-ppcg-f8rj
• GO-2026-5979 CVE-2026-50006 GHSA-xrcf-6jh3-ggvx
• GO-2026-5980 CVE-2026-50158 GHSA-2c7f-fxww-6w6c
• GO-2026-5981 GHSA-mqxv-9rm6-w8qc
• GO-2026-5982 GHSA-pqg7-v6wh-3pfp
• GO-2026-5984 CVE-2026-53604 GHSA-2p2f-px33-4vv5
• GO-2026-5985 GHSA-7rx3-5wx3-5v76
• GO-2026-5986 CVE-2026-61699 GHSA-cm26-5974-52h8
• GO-2026-5987 CVE-2026-55513 GHSA-g4x6-jcvr-9m3g
• GO-2026-5988 CVE-2026-54628 GHSA-hwrq-8wxh-q4xv
• GO-2026-5989 CVE-2026-55512 GHSA-m3cx-mwpg-32jg
• GO-2026-5990 CVE-2026-54629 GHSA-mf78-3rpf-r784
• GO-2026-5991 CVE-2026-53603 GHSA-q4vm-pq3q-8wgq
• GO-2026-5992 CVE-2026-61549 GHSA-qf34-295c-26v8
• GO-2026-5996 CVE-2026-54450 GHSA-pph6-vfjv-vpjw
• GO-2026-5997 CVE-2026-54452 GHSA-xgch-x3mx-cm3c
• GO-2026-5998 CVE-2026-54495 GHSA-398h-7f66-3h4p
• GO-2026-5999 CVE-2026-10814 GHSA-jh6h-v6mp-h22v
• GO-2026-6002 CVE-2026-58196 GHSA-pr64-jmmf-jp54
• GO-2026-6003 CVE-2026-53714 GHSA-22xc-xg2r-9j7v
• GO-2026-6004 CVE-2026-52833 GHSA-3v79-m2cg-89ww
• GO-2026-6005 CVE-2026-53715 GHSA-8fv2-88gg-hm7q
• GO-2026-6006 CVE-2026-53716 GHSA-cxpq-8v7q-cg56 *…