Know every vulnerabilitybefore it knows you.
DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.
GHSA-3f62-qv96-4p78
No affected components available
Summary
In @actual-app/sync-server, the GET /secret/:name endpoint (app-secrets.js:53) checks only that the caller has a valid session — it does not verify the caller is an admin. The sibling POST /secret/ handler does enforce an admin check in OpenID mode, exposing an authorization asymmetry. Any authenticated non-admin (BASIC) user in OpenID multi-user deployments can probe the secrets store and learn which admin-managed bank-sync integrations have been configured (existence, not values). This includes integration credentials that are not otherwise observable to non-admins, such as simplefin_accessKey, pluggyai_clientSecret, pluggyai_itemIds, and the gocardless_* secrets.
Details
packages/sync-server/src/app-secrets.js mounts validateSessionMiddleware at the router level (line 15), so all handlers inherit only "must be authenticated." The POST handler then explicitly upgrades to an admin check when the active auth method is openid:
// app-secrets.js:17-46
app.post('/', async (req, res) => {
// ... look up active auth method ...
if (method === 'openid') {
const canSaveSecrets = isAdmin(res.locals.user_id);
if (!canSaveSecrets) {
res.status(403).send({
status: 'error',
reason: 'not-admin',
details: 'You have to be admin to set secrets',
});
return;
}
}
secretsService.set(name, value);
// ...
});
The sibling GET handler skips both the method check and the admin check entirely:
// app-secrets.js:53-61
app.get('/:name', async (req, res) => {
const name = req.params.name;
const keyExists = secretsService.exists(name);
if (keyExists) {
res.sendStatus(204);
} else {
res.status(404).send('key not found');
}
});
The intent — visible from the POST handler's "You have to be admin to set secrets" — is that this store holds admin-managed credentials. The valid secret names enumerated in services/secrets-service.js (SecretName) are: gocardless_secretId, gocardless_secretKey, simplefin_token, simplefin_accessKey, pluggyai_clientId, pluggyai_clientSecret, pluggyai_itemIds.
In OpenID mode, BASIC users obtain valid sessions through packages/sync-server/src/accounts/openid.ts:264-274 — either auto-created (userCreationMode=login) or pre-provisioned by the admin (userCreationMode=manual). With that BASIC session token they can hit GET /secret/:name and distinguish 204 (configured) from 404 (missing), enumerating each admin-managed secret name. Some signals (simplefin_token existence, pluggyai_clientId existence) are already coarsely observable via the unauthenticated bank-sync status endpoints (app-simplefin.js:18, app-pluggyai.js:18); the rest (simplefin_accessKey, pluggyai_clientSecret, pluggyai_itemIds, both gocardless_* secrets) are not otherwise probeable.
This is structurally identical to the previously reported missing-admin-check on GET /admin/users/ (app-admin.js:28): a POST sibling enforces admin authorization while the GET sibling omits it.
PoC
Pre-requisites:
- Server is configured for OpenID multi-user mode (
ACTUAL_OPENID_ENFORCE=trueor auth method isopenid). - An admin has configured one or more bank-sync integrations.
- The attacker is any authenticated BASIC user (auto-created via
userCreationMode=login, or admin-provisioned in the defaultmanualmode).
Step 1 — capture a BASIC user's session token in $TOKEN (standard OpenID login flow, no admin role required).
Step 2 — probe each admin-managed secret name:
for name in gocardless_secretId gocardless_secretKey \
simplefin_token simplefin_accessKey \
pluggyai_clientId pluggyai_clientSecret pluggyai_itemIds; do
status=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' \
-H "X-ACTUAL-TOKEN: $TOKEN" \
https://actual.example.com/secret/$name)
echo "$name -> $status" # 204 = configured, 404 = missing
done
Step 3 — confirm the asymmetry by attempting to write a secret (correctly rejected for non-admins):
curl -s -H "X-ACTUAL-TOKEN: $TOKEN" \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"name":"pluggyai_itemIds","value":"x"}' \
https://actual.example.com/secret/
# {"status":"error","reason":"not-admin","details":"You have to be admin to set secrets"}
The POST returns 403 not-admin; the GET returns 204/404 unauthenticated-against-role.
Impact
- A non-admin authenticated user in OpenID multi-user mode can enumerate which admin-managed bank-sync integrations the deployment uses.
- This reveals whether GoCardless, SimpleFIN, and/or Pluggy AI are configured, and which auxiliary credentials the admin has set (e.g.
simplefin_accessKey,pluggyai_clientSecret,pluggyai_itemIds) — none of which are otherwise observable to non-admins. - The disclosure is existence-only; secret values are not returned. Impact is limited to recon useful for targeted follow-on attacks (e.g. credential phishing, picking which integration to attack on a separate vulnerability).
- No integrity or availability impact.
Recommended Fix
Mirror the POST handler's admin gate on the GET handler. Minimal patch in packages/sync-server/src/app-secrets.js:
app.get('/:name', async (req, res) => {
let method;
try {
const result = getAccountDb().first(
'SELECT method FROM auth WHERE active = 1',
);
method = result?.method;
} catch (error) {
console.error('Failed to fetch auth method:', error);
return res.status(500).send({
status: 'error',
reason: 'database-error',
details: 'Failed to validate authentication method',
});
}
if (method === 'openid' && !isAdmin(res.locals.user_id)) {
return res.status(403).send({
status: 'error',
reason: 'not-admin',
details: 'You have to be admin to read secret status',
});
}
const name = req.params.name;
const keyExists = secretsService.exists(name);
if (keyExists) {
res.sendStatus(204);
} else {
res.status(404).send('key not found');
}
});
Consider factoring the method-lookup + admin-check into a shared helper used by both POST and GET to prevent the same asymmetry from recurring. Also consider restricting :name to the SecretName enum so unrelated probing is rejected up front.
The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker needs basic access or low-level privileges. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a low impact on the confidentiality of the information.
Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.
The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.
We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.
Browse More
Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.
Checkout DevGuard