Improper AuthenticationWeakness · CWE-287

CVE-2026-41571

CRITICAL · 9.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-04
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Note Mark is an open-source note-taking application. In version 0.19.2, IsPasswordMatch in backend/db/models.go falls back to a hard-coded bcrypt("null") placeholder whenever a user has no stored password. OIDC-registered users are created with an empty password, so anyone who submits password: "null" to the internal login endpoint receives a valid session for that user. The bypass is unauthenticated and requires no user interaction. This issue has been patched in version 0.19.3.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

The IsPasswordMatch function in Note Mark 0.19.2 contains an authentication bypass where it defaults to a hard-coded bcrypt hash of the string 'null' when a user has no stored password. OIDC-registered users are provisioned with empty passwords, making them vulnerable to anyone who authenticates with password:'null' against the login endpoint, granting unauthorized session access.

MitigationUpgrade to Note Mark version 0.19.3 or later to patch the vulnerable IsPasswordMatch function. Additionally, audit OIDC-provisioned user accounts and invalidate any sessions potentially obtained through this bypass.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed Note Mark version
    Check the application's version by reviewing the binary, release notes, or querying the application's version endpoint if available. Common locations: --version flag, about page, or metadata files in the installation directory.
    Affected if The installed version is 0.19.2 exactly, or falls within the range 0.19.0 to 0.19.2 inclusive.
  2. Confirm OIDC authentication is configured
    Review the Note Mark configuration file (typically config.yaml, config.json, or environment variables) for OIDC provider settings such as OIDC_ISSUER, OIDC_CLIENT_ID, OIDC_CLIENT_SECRET, or similar OIDC-related parameters.
    Affected if OIDC authentication is enabled and configured, which results in users being created with empty password fields.
  3. Inspect database for users with empty passwords
    Query the database (likely a SQLite, PostgreSQL, or MySQL database) for user records where the password_hash or password field is empty, null, or unset. The table is typically named 'users' in the backend/db/models.go schema.
    Affected if Any user records exist with empty or null password fields, indicating they are vulnerable to the 'null' password bypass.
  4. Verify IsPasswordMatch function behavior
    If source code access is available, review backend/db/models.go and locate the IsPasswordMatch function. Check for hardcoded bcrypt hash comparisons or fallback logic that handles empty/null passwords.
    Affected if The function contains a fallback bcrypt comparison using a hardcoded hash (particularly bcrypt("null")) for users without stored passwords.
  5. Test authentication with null password
    Send a POST request to the login endpoint with a payload containing an OIDC user's identifier and password set to the literal string 'null' (for example: {"username": "<user>", "password": "null"}).
    Affected if The authentication succeeds and returns a valid session token, confirming the vulnerability is exploitable.

A user is affected if they run Note Mark version 0.19.2 (or any 0.19.x version prior to 0.19.3), have OIDC authentication enabled, and have users with empty password fields in the database.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to Note Mark version 0.19.3 or later to patch the vulnerable IsPasswordMatch function. Additionally, audit OIDC-provisioned user accounts and invalidate any sessions potentially obtained through this bypass.

Recommended fix High confidence

0.19.3

  1. Upgrade Note Mark from version 0.19.2 to version 0.19.3 or later
  2. Verify the application version after upgrade to confirm the fix is applied
  3. Test OIDC login functionality to ensure it works correctly post-upgrade

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,540
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,464.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41571 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-41571 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data