CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-44522NVD status: Deferred

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application.

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-44522 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in note-mark from Enchant97, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.6 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, but only if a user takes part, for example by opening a link or file. Affected note-mark versions: >= 0.13.0, < 0.19.4. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.56% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of note-mark you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Because the attack needs a user to take part, warn users about unexpected links and files related to this product until it is patched.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Enchant97note-mark>= 0.13.0, < 0.19.4Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
PassiveA user only needs to do something routine, such as viewing a page.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official description

Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. From 0.13.0 to before 0.19.4, the Note Mark application allows authenticated users to upload assets to notes via POST /api/notes/{noteID}/assets, where the asset filename is provided through the X-Name HTTP request header. This value is stored directly in the database without any sanitization or validation - no path separator filtering, no directory traversal sequence rejection, and no use of filepath.Base() to strip directory components. The unsanitized name is persisted as-is in the note_assets table (Name column, varchar(80)). When an administrator subsequently runs the data export CLI commands (note-mark migrate export-v1 or note-mark migrate export), the stored asset name is passed directly into filepath.Join() and path.Join() calls as part of the output file path argument to os.Create(). Since Go's filepath.Join() resolves ../ sequences during path normalization, an attacker-controlled asset name containing directory traversal sequences causes the export process to write files to arbitrary locations on the filesystem, completely outside the intended export directory. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.19.4.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
  • Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
  • Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

More Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-20)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in note-mark

All note-mark vulnerabilities

Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.