CVE-2026-40103

mediumpriority · track · 22OT risk · elevatedEPSS 0.002 · 13 %ileEUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.22% (13th) EPSS
CVSS 5.4 · medium
Is it mine?
4 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

Vikunja is an open-source self-hosted task management platform. Prior to 2.3.0, Vikunja's scoped API token enforcement for custom project background routes is method-confused. A token with only projects.background can successfully delete a project background, while a token with only projects.background_delete is rejected. This is a scoped-token authorization bypass. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.0.

01

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

5.4
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode

v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 2.8 · impact 2.5
v3.14.3mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.14.3mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Nsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 2.8 · impact 1.4
v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · OSV
v3.15mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (4)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (2)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-v479-vf79-mg83Vikunja: Scoped API tokens with projects.background permission can delete project backgrounds2026-04-10ghsa · osvUS

    ### Summary Vikunja's scoped API token enforcement for custom project background routes is method-confused. A token with only `projects.background` can successfully delete a project background, while a token with only `projects.background_delete` is rejected. This is a scoped-token authorization bypass. ### Details I verified this locally on commit `c5450fb55f5192508638cbb3a6956438452a712e`. Relevant code paths: * `pkg/models/api_routes.go` * `pkg/routes/routes.go` * `pkg/modules/background/handler/background.go` Route registration exposes separate permissions for the same path: * `GET /api/v1/projects/:project/background` -> `projects.background` * `DELETE /api/v1/projects/:project/background` -> `projects.background_delete` At enforcement time, `CanDoAPIRoute()` falls back to the parent group and reconstructs the child permission from the path segments only. For the DELETE request, that becomes `background`, so the matcher accepts any token containing `projects.background` without re-checking the HTTP method or matching the stored route detail. This matters because `RemoveProjectBackground()` is a real destructive operation: * It checks project update rights. * It deletes the background file if present. * It clears the project's `BackgroundFileID`. ### PoC 1. Log in as a user who can update a project that already has a background. 2. Create an API token with only: `{"projects":["background"]}` 3. Send: `DELETE /api/v1/projects/<project_id>/background` `Authorization: Bearer <token>` 4. Observe that the request succeeds and the project background is removed. **For comparison:** 1. Create an API token with only: `{"projects":["background_delete"]}` 2. Repeat the same DELETE request. 3. Observe that the request is rejected with `401 Unauthorized`. I confirmed this locally with three validations: 1. `/api/v1/routes` advertises both `background` and `background_delete`. 2. The matcher unit test proves `CanDoAPIRoute()` accepts DELETE for `background`. 3. The webtest proves a real API token with only `background` successfully deletes the background. ### Impact Scoped API tokens can exceed their intended capability. A token intended for project background access can delete project backgrounds, which weakens the trust model for automation and third-party integrations that rely on narrowly scoped tokens. The attacker needs a valid API token created by a user who has update rights on the target project, but the token itself only needs the weaker `projects.background` permission.

  • GO-2026-5650Vikunja: Scoped API tokens with projects.background permission can delete project backgrounds in code.vikunja.io/api2026-06-25vendor · osvUS

    Vikunja: Scoped API tokens with projects.background permission can delete project backgrounds in code.vikunja.io/api. NOTE: The source advisory for this report contains additional versions that could not be automatically mapped to standard Go module versions. (If this is causing false-positive reports from vulnerability scanners, please suggest an edit to the report.) The additional affected modules and versions are: code.vikunja.io/api before v2.3.0.

06

also known as (5)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-04-10modified 2026-10-26
08

references (14)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan