CVE-2026-50554
When the request is ?deleted=true, the service runs the query with Unscoped() (bypassing GORM's soft-delete scope) but keeps the read-authorization clause as "owner_id = ?
Does this matter?
Lower severity and a low EPSS score (0.24%). Track it; it rarely justifies an emergency change on its own.
Description
Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. Prior to version 0.19.5, GET /api/books/{bookID}/notes is an unauthenticated endpoint that accepts a "deleted" query parameter. When the request is ?deleted=true, the service runs the query with Unscoped() (bypassing GORM's soft-delete scope) but keeps the read-authorization clause as "owner_id = ? OR is_public = ?". As a result, any unauthenticated caller can enumerate the metadata of soft-deleted ("trashed") notes belonging to any public book — notes the owner explicitly deleted and expected to be removed from public view. This issue has been patched in version 0.19.5.
- CVSS 3.1
- 5.3 MEDIUMCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
- EPSS
- 0.24% probability · 16th percentile
- CISA KEV
- Not listed
- Weakness
- CWE-200, CWE-285
- Source
- security-advisories@github.com
References
- https://github.com/enchant97/note-mark/commit/9c9b72740f22a06131a8f64b53bb08e3b05b81a6
- https://github.com/enchant97/note-mark/releases/tag/v0.19.5
- https://github.com/enchant97/note-mark/security/advisories/GHSA-588f-fvcv-xhvf
- https://github.com/enchant97/note-mark/security/advisories/GHSA-588f-fvcv-xhvf
Source: NVD record, EPSS from FIRST.org, KEV from CISA. Refreshed daily.