CVE-2026-72805

GHSA-67x2-mq63-v9vm MEDIUM
Published September 3, 2026

**CVE:** This vulnerability corresponds to [CVE-2026-72805](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-72805). ### Summary Three block endpoints return document content snippets and metadata without any publish-access check, while their sibling `getBlockInfo` which returns comparable data does...

Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.

What systems are affected?

Package Ecosystem Vulnerable Range Patched
Jupyter Notebook go < 0.0.0-20260723163028-931ba693375e 0.0.0-20260723163028-931ba693375e
13.3K OpenSSF 5.7 3.0K dependents Pushed 10d ago 79% patched ~133d to patch Full package profile →

Do you use Jupyter Notebook? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1
5.8 / 10
EPSS
0.2%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
Higher than 15% of all CVEs
Exploitation Status
No known exploitation
Sophistication
N/A

What is the attack surface?

AV AC PR UI S C I A
AV Network
AC Low
PR None
UI None
S Changed
C Low
I None
A None

What should I do?

Patch available

Update Jupyter Notebook to version 0.0.0-20260723163028-931ba693375e

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-72805?

**CVE:** This vulnerability corresponds to [CVE-2026-72805](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-72805). ### Summary Three block endpoints return document content snippets and metadata without any publish-access check, while their sibling `getBlockInfo` which returns comparable data does enforce one. All three are `CheckAuth`-only, so they are reachable by the publish `RoleReader` token and by the anonymous account when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`. An anonymous reader supplying a block ID receives content and metadata belonging to publish-forbidden and password-protected documents. ### Details `getBlockInfo` (`kernel/api/block.go`) gates on the publish boundary: ```go if !checkBlockPublishAccess(c, id, ret) { return } ``` The following siblings in the same file perform no equivalent check: | Endpoint | Returns | Publish check | |---|---|---| | `getBlockInfo` | root/title/path metadata | `checkBlockPublishAccess`: present | | `getBlockBreadcrumb` | `BlockPath.Name` : root document title plus every ancestor block's content snippet | none | | `getRefText` | the block's reference/anchor text (document content) | none | | `getBlockTreeInfos` | root/title/path metadata for arbitrary block IDs | none | `getBlockBreadcrumb` returns the full ancestor chain including each ancestor block's content snippet, and `getRefText` returns block anchor text both are document content, not just metadata. `getBlockTreeInfos` returns root/title/path for any caller-supplied ID set via `model.GetBlockTreeInfosInBox(...)` with no gate. `getBlockBreadcrumb` and `getRefText` additionally accept a client-supplied notebook argument that routes to the `*InBox` variants, so the same unguarded path applies to encrypted-notebook reads while the notebook is unlocked. The correct primitive already exists in the codebase and is used by `getBlockInfo`; these three handlers simply do not call it. ### Proof of Concept Precondition: publish mode enabled (default port 6808); anonymous when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`, otherwise any publish reader account. A document `D` is marked publish-forbidden (or password-protected) and contains a block `BLOCK_ID` under a heading with distinctive content. **Control: the gated sibling correctly refuses:** ``` POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockInfo {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} ``` Blocked by `checkBlockPublishAccess`. **Disclosure: the ungated siblings return the data anyway:** ``` POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockBreadcrumb {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} → ancestor chain including the forbidden document's title and ancestor block content snippets POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getRefText {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} → the block's reference/anchor text (content of the forbidden document) POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockTreeInfos {"ids":["BLOCK_ID"]} → root ID, title, and path for the forbidden document ``` Verified by code inspection at `origin/master` (`eef10568`): `getBlockInfo` contains the `checkBlockPublishAccess` call; `getBlockBreadcrumb`, `getRefText`, and `getBlockTreeInfos` contain no publish-access, publish-ignore, or readonly-role check in their bodies. ### Impact An anonymous reader (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish `RoleReader` can read, for documents explicitly excluded from publishing or protected by a publish password: - the document title and full ancestor chain, including ancestor block content snippets (`getBlockBreadcrumb`); - block reference/anchor text, i.e. document content (`getRefText`); - root ID, title, and path metadata for arbitrary block IDs (`getBlockTreeInfos`). Because `getBlockBreadcrumb` and `getRefText` accept a notebook argument routing to the `*InBox` variants, the same disclosure applies to encrypted notebooks while unlocked. Confidentiality-only; the precondition is a block ID, obtainable from other reader-reachable endpoints. ### Suggested fix Call `checkBlockPublishAccess` (as `getBlockInfo` does) in `getBlockBreadcrumb`, `getRefText`, and `getBlockTreeInfos` before returning data for `getBlockTreeInfos`, apply it per ID and drop unauthorized entries. Confirm the `*InBox` variants (`GetBlockRefTextInBox`, `BuildBlockBreadcrumbInBox`) enforce the same boundary so the notebook-argument path is covered.

Is CVE-2026-72805 actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-72805 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix CVE-2026-72805?

Update to patched version: Jupyter Notebook 0.0.0-20260723163028-931ba693375e.

What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-72805?

CVE-2026-72805 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.8 (MEDIUM). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.24%.

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

**CVE:** This vulnerability corresponds to [CVE-2026-72805](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-72805). ### Summary Three block endpoints return document content snippets and metadata without any publish-access check, while their sibling `getBlockInfo` which returns comparable data does enforce one. All three are `CheckAuth`-only, so they are reachable by the publish `RoleReader` token and by the anonymous account when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`. An anonymous reader supplying a block ID receives content and metadata belonging to publish-forbidden and password-protected documents. ### Details `getBlockInfo` (`kernel/api/block.go`) gates on the publish boundary: ```go if !checkBlockPublishAccess(c, id, ret) { return } ``` The following siblings in the same file perform no equivalent check: | Endpoint | Returns | Publish check | |---|---|---| | `getBlockInfo` | root/title/path metadata | `checkBlockPublishAccess`: present | | `getBlockBreadcrumb` | `BlockPath.Name` : root document title plus every ancestor block's content snippet | none | | `getRefText` | the block's reference/anchor text (document content) | none | | `getBlockTreeInfos` | root/title/path metadata for arbitrary block IDs | none | `getBlockBreadcrumb` returns the full ancestor chain including each ancestor block's content snippet, and `getRefText` returns block anchor text both are document content, not just metadata. `getBlockTreeInfos` returns root/title/path for any caller-supplied ID set via `model.GetBlockTreeInfosInBox(...)` with no gate. `getBlockBreadcrumb` and `getRefText` additionally accept a client-supplied notebook argument that routes to the `*InBox` variants, so the same unguarded path applies to encrypted-notebook reads while the notebook is unlocked. The correct primitive already exists in the codebase and is used by `getBlockInfo`; these three handlers simply do not call it. ### Proof of Concept Precondition: publish mode enabled (default port 6808); anonymous when `Publish.Auth.Enable` is `false`, otherwise any publish reader account. A document `D` is marked publish-forbidden (or password-protected) and contains a block `BLOCK_ID` under a heading with distinctive content. **Control: the gated sibling correctly refuses:** ``` POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockInfo {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} ``` Blocked by `checkBlockPublishAccess`. **Disclosure: the ungated siblings return the data anyway:** ``` POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockBreadcrumb {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} → ancestor chain including the forbidden document's title and ancestor block content snippets POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getRefText {"id":"BLOCK_ID"} → the block's reference/anchor text (content of the forbidden document) POST http://127.0.0.1:6808/api/block/getBlockTreeInfos {"ids":["BLOCK_ID"]} → root ID, title, and path for the forbidden document ``` Verified by code inspection at `origin/master` (`eef10568`): `getBlockInfo` contains the `checkBlockPublishAccess` call; `getBlockBreadcrumb`, `getRefText`, and `getBlockTreeInfos` contain no publish-access, publish-ignore, or readonly-role check in their bodies. ### Impact An anonymous reader (publish mode with auth disabled) or any publish `RoleReader` can read, for documents explicitly excluded from publishing or protected by a publish password: - the document title and full ancestor chain, including ancestor block content snippets (`getBlockBreadcrumb`); - block reference/anchor text, i.e. document content (`getRefText`); - root ID, title, and path metadata for arbitrary block IDs (`getBlockTreeInfos`). Because `getBlockBreadcrumb` and `getRefText` accept a notebook argument routing to the `*InBox` variants, the same disclosure applies to encrypted notebooks while unlocked. Confidentiality-only; the precondition is a block ID, obtainable from other reader-reachable endpoints. ### Suggested fix Call `checkBlockPublishAccess` (as `getBlockInfo` does) in `getBlockBreadcrumb`, `getRefText`, and `getBlockTreeInfos` before returning data for `getBlockTreeInfos`, apply it per ID and drop unauthorized entries. Confirm the `*InBox` variants (`GetBlockRefTextInBox`, `BuildBlockBreadcrumbInBox`) enforce the same boundary so the notebook-argument path is covered.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-862 — Missing Authorization: The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

  • [Architecture and Design] Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • [Architecture and Design] Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.

CVSS Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N

Timeline

Published
September 3, 2026
Last Modified
September 3, 2026
First Seen
September 4, 2026

Related Vulnerabilities