Skip to content

Gramps Web API: Private Sub-Object Data in Non-Private Objects Exposed to Guest Users

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 8, 2026 in gramps-project/gramps-web-api • Updated Apr 9, 2026

Package

pip gramps-webapi (pip)

Affected versions

< 3.11.0

Patched versions

3.11.0

Description

Summary

Users with the Guest role could receive private sub-object data (e.g. private alternate names, private addresses, private note/citation/media handles) through list API endpoints such as GET /api/people/, GET /api/places/, GET /api/events/, and all other object list endpoints.

This does not expose objects (people, places, events, …) that are themselves marked private. Top-level private objects are correctly excluded from all responses. Only sub-object data attached to otherwise-public objects is affected.

Affected Versions

All versions of Gramps Web API prior to the fix.

Root Cause

The vulnerability originates from the behaviour of PrivateProxyDb.iter_*() in Gramps core. The ProxyDbBase.__iter_object() helper, which backs all iter_*() methods in PrivateProxyDb, correctly filters out top-level private objects but returns the remaining objects unsanitized — i.e. without stripping private sub-object references. In contrast, PrivateProxyDb.get_*_from_handle() does call the appropriate sanitize_*() function.

Gramps Web API's ModifiedPrivateProxyDb (which wraps the raw database for non-admin users) inherited this behaviour without override.

The same issue affects Gramps desktop features that consume iter_*() output: reports and exports generated via Gramps desktop using PrivateProxyDb may also include private sub-object data that should have been stripped.

Conditions Required

This issue only affects trees in which sub-objects have been explicitly marked private in Gramps desktop. The Gramps Web frontend UI does not expose controls for setting the private flag on sub-objects (alternate names, addresses, notes,
citations, media references, event references, etc.). In practice, such flags are set in Gramps desktop and then synced or imported into Gramps Web.

Impact

When the conditions above are met, a user with the Guest role querying any list endpoint receives:

  • Full content of private embedded sub-objects on people, such as alternate names (first name, surname, etc.) and addresses (street, city, etc.).
  • Handles referencing private notes, citations, and media attached to places, events, sources, and other objects. These reveal the existence of private
    linked objects but not their content; fetching those objects by handle is correctly blocked by the proxy.

Fix

ModifiedPrivateProxyDb now overrides all iter_*() object methods to check obj.get_privacy() directly on the already-loaded object (eliminating the redundant per-object refetch) and to call the appropriate sanitize_*() function before yielding each object. This is consistent with the behaviour of get_*_from_handle() in PrivateProxyDb.

References

@DavidMStraub DavidMStraub published to gramps-project/gramps-web-api Apr 8, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 9, 2026
Reviewed Apr 9, 2026
Last updated Apr 9, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity None
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-9gjv-jvm7-vv2v

Source code

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.