Summary
Cloudreve: Broken Access Control in file event stream: a single-file share recipient is subscribed to the owner's parent folder and receives activity events for unshared siblings
When an authenticated recipient of a single-file share opens the file event stream (GET /api/v4/file/events?uri=<share-root>), Cloudreve validates the URI by listing it and then subscribes the caller to parent.ID(). For a single-file share, the share navigator resolves the bare share-root URI to the owner-side parent folder of the shared file (not the file), while the visible listing is filtered down to just the shared file. The event hub then keys topics by numeric file ID only and, on each file change, fans the event out to subscribers of every ancestor topic, filtering only the client ID that caused the event, never the subscriber's share scope.
Consequently, a recipient of one shared file can receive Server-Sent Events (type, sibling path/name, rename target, hashed file ID) for other files and subfolders in the owner's parent folder that were never shared. Contents are not disclosed; file-activity metadata is.
Details
Root cause (verified at 26b6b10)
1. Events route, authenticated, feature-flagged, no share-scope check (routers/router.go):
file := v4.Group("file"); file.Use(middleware.RequiredScopes(types.ScopeFilesRead))
file.GET("events",
middleware.LoginRequired(),
middleware.IsFunctionEnabled(func(c *gin.Context) bool { return dep.SettingProvider().EventHubEnabled(c) }),
controllers.FromQuery[explorer.ExplorerEventService](...), controllers.HandleExplorerEventsPush)
EventHubEnabled defaults true (inventory/setting.go: "fs_event_push_enabled":"1").
2. Service subscribes to the listed parent's ID (service/explorer/events.go):
parent, _, err := m.List(c, uri, &manager.ListArgs{Page:0, PageSize:1}) // also runs share validity/password
...
rx, resumed, err := eventHub.Subscribe(c, parent.ID(), requestInfo.ClientID)
3. Single-file share Root swaps the share root to the owner parent (share_navigator.go):
n.shareRoot = newFile(nil, share.Edges.File)
...
if n.shareRoot.Type() == types.FileTypeFile {
n.singleFileShare = true
n.shareRoot = n.shareRoot.Parent // <-- owner-side parent folder
}
4. To returns that parent for the bare root URI (share_navigator.go):
elements := path.Elements()
if len(elements) == 1 && n.singleFileShare { return latestSharedSingleFile(...) } // only when URI names the file
...
return current // current == shareRoot == owner parent folder
The bare root share URI has zero path elements (URI.Elements() returns nil for path /), so the len(elements)==1 guard is skipped and To returns the parent folder. dbfs.List returns that as parent, so parent.ID() is the owner parent folder's real ID.
5. Children masks the broader parent, for singleFileShare it returns only []*File{sharedFile}, so the recipient's listing shows just the shared file even though the subscribed topic is the whole parent.
6. Publication fans out to ancestor topics with only a client-ID filter (dbfs/events.go):
func (f *DBFS) getEligibleSubscriber(ctx, file, checkParentPerm) []foundSubscriber {
roots := file.Ancestors()
for _, root := range roots {
subscribers := f.eventHub.GetSubscribers(ctx, root.Model.ID)
subscribers = lo.Filter(subscribers, func(s eventhub.Subscriber, _ int) bool {
return !(requestInfo != nil && s.ID() == requestInfo.ClientID) // ONLY exclude the causing client
})
...
}
}
// emit*: From: subscriber.relativePath(file) // owner-side path of the changed sibling
relativePath trims the changed file's owner path by the subscribed root's owner path, yielding the sibling's name (e.g. /Secret-Plan.pdf). No check that the subscriber is authorized for the changed file or within their share scope.
Validation performed
Independent validation against commit 26b6b10 in a clean sandbox.
Source-verified (static): all of (1)–(6) confirmed verbatim, including the negative direction (an explicit …/shared.txt URI resolves to the file, and oss/qiniu-style flows are irrelevant here).
Dynamic (control-flow executed): the full binary is not buildable offline (modules behind an unreachable proxy, embedded frontend, DB/eventhub). The reseacher ran two harnesses:
- A
net/url-based check of the linchpin, the bare root share URI yields0path elements (soToreturns the parent), while…/shared.txtyields1(returns the file). This is the subtle point on which the whole finding turns, and it holds. - A model of
Root/To/getEligibleSubscriber/relativePathdriving the end-to-end flow:
[1] single-file share root URI -> m.List parent = "docs" (id 10), NOT shared.txt (id 11) -> subscribed to owner parent
[2] owner renames /docs/Secret-Plan.pdf -> client 'attacker' receives: from="/Secret-Plan.pdf" file_id=12 (topic 10)
[3] CONTROL: event caused by attacker's own client id -> suppressed (the only filter)
[4] CONTROL: explicit URI 'shared.txt' -> resolves to file (id 11) -> no sibling events
Steps to reproduce
- Owner shares a single file
shared.txtfrom/docs, which also containsSecret-Plan.pdf. - Recipient (logged-in,
Files.Read, with the share password if any) opens the event stream on the share root:GET /api/v4/file/events?uri=cloudreve%3A%2F%2F<share-id>%40share Cookie: cloudreve-session=<recipient-session> X-Cr-Client-Id: <uuid> Accept: text/event-stream - Owner creates/renames/modifies/moves/deletes
Secret-Plan.pdf. - The recipient's stream receives, e.g.:
event: event data: {"type":"rename","file_id":"<hashed>","from":"/Secret-Plan.pdf","to":"/Secret-Plan-v2.pdf"}
Expected: the recipient only receives events for the shared file.
Actual: the recipient receives activity events for unshared siblings in the owner's parent folder.
Impact
A single-file share recipient gains a real-time feed of file-activity metadata for the owner's parent folder, sibling names, operation types, and rename targets they were never granted access to. No file contents are exposed.
The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions. Typical impact: unauthorized data access or execution of privileged operations.
CVE-2026-55499 has a CVSS score of 4.3 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
- For single-file shares, subscribe to the shared file's ID, or reject event subscriptions on the single-file share root view.
- Store an authorization scope (navigator/share root) per subscriber and publish only events whose path stays within that scope.
- Incorporate user/share scope into topic keys, not just file ID + client ID.
- On subscriber reactivation, re-verify the requester still matches the subscriber and is authorized for the topic.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-55499? CVE-2026-55499 is a medium-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in github.com/cloudreve/Cloudreve/v4 (go), affecting versions < 4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13. It is fixed in 4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13. The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions.
- How severe is CVE-2026-55499? CVE-2026-55499 has a CVSS score of 4.3 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-55499?
github.com/cloudreve/Cloudreve/v4(go) (versions < 4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13)github.com/cloudreve/Cloudreve/v3(go) (versions <= 3.0.0-20250225100611-da4e44b77af4)
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-55499? Yes. CVE-2026-55499 is fixed in 4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-55499 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-55499 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-55499 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-55499? Upgrade
github.com/cloudreve/Cloudreve/v4to 4.0.0-20260613030215-0b00dd308f13 or later.