-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GUEST access acts as a backdoor?!? #534
Comments
Very stupid mistake, is fixed now. @Technosoft2000, @CHBMB: There is a serious sequrity hole in all calibre-web versions. Everybody can login with a username guest and a very easy guessable password. I fixed it, and I want to encourage you to update the dockerversions if necessary. (I'm not sure if updating calibre-web in the docker container works?) |
Yes it does |
Thanks for the info :) |
@OzzieIsaacs No problem will get it sorted. Thanks for letting me know. |
Push new build to remove this [vulnerability](janeczku/calibre-web#534)
Push new build to remove this [vulnerability](janeczku/calibre-web#534)
Push new build to remove this [vulnerability](janeczku/calibre-web#534)
Push new build to remove this [vulnerability](janeczku/calibre-web#534)
Hello.
First, let me congratulate you for this project. It is a very cool endeavour indeed, and it shows that it has a lot of work on it.
I've just installed it in a Linux Mint using git & pip et al.
The configuration did not gave me an problems, except that had to create 2 files from scratch:
/lib/systemd/system/calibre.service
/etc/init.d/calibre
After that, everything was going smoothly. Changed the admin password, started creating some new users, even started uploading some pdf's and epub's that I have.
Then I started checking the configuration of the users that I had created. And realized that they had "jumped" one...
"admin" is user 1. Ok. But my user "rodolfo" was number "3". I did not created ANY previous user. So I checked the code.
And to my surprise, in "cps/ub.py" there is code for the creation of a "Guest" user with a password hard-coded: xxx
xxx as a password?!?! And THAT is not visible anywhere in the configuration process?!?
And THAT user has access to list ALL my books?!? I think I don't like that very much...
Even so, it would be nice to disable that "feature" altogether, don't you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: