By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00003682 / Revision 4

Kimai: Teamlead authorization bypass in GET /api/timesheets allows reading other users' timesheet records without being teamlead of the target

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for kimai/kimai. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-4m8q-55qv-9pwpCVE-2026-52819

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

EPSS

0.496%

FIRST EPSS model v2026.06.15; exploitation probability over 30 days, percentile 0.42628. Missing scores are unknown.

As of · FIRST EPSS

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

kimai/kimai

source listed
  • <= 2.56.0

## Summary `GET /api/timesheets?user=` (and `users[]=`) returns the targeted user's timesheet records to any caller that has the `view_other_timesheet` permission, without verifying that the caller is teamlead of any team containing the target user. The per-record endpoint `GET /api/timesheets/{id}` correctly enforces this check via `TimesheetVoter`/`RolePermissionManager::checkTeamAccessTimesheet` → `checkTeamLeadAccess`, but the list endpoint only filters projects/customers by team membership and never validates `t.user`. A `ROLE_TEAMLEAD` user can therefore enumerate any user's records — including the `rate` field — as long as those records are on a project with no team scoping (Kimai's default) or on any project that shares any team (membership, not lead) with the requester. ## Details **Root cause:** authorization mismatch between the per-record voter and the list endpoint. ### Per-record path (correct) `src/Voter/TimesheetVoter.php:138`: ```php if (!$this->permissionManager->checkTeamAccessTimesheet($subject, $user)) { return false; } return $this->permissionManager->hasRolePermission($user, $permission . '_other_timesheet'); ``` `checkTeamLeadAccess` (RoleP

GitHub Advisory Database

kimai/kimai

source listed
  • ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 2.57.0

## Summary `GET /api/timesheets?user=` (and `users[]=`) returns the targeted user's timesheet records to any caller that has the `view_other_timesheet` permission, without verifying that the caller is teamlead of any team containing the target user. The per-record endpoint `GET /api/timesheets/{id}` correctly enforces this check via `TimesheetVoter`/`RolePermissionManager::checkTeamAccessTimesheet` → `checkTeamLeadAccess`, but the list endpoint only filters projects/customers by team membership and never validates `t.user`. A `ROLE_TEAMLEAD` user can therefore enumerate any user's records — including the `rate` field — as long as those records are on a project with no team scoping (Kimai's default) or on any project that shares any team (membership, not lead) with the requester. ## Details **Root cause:** authorization mismatch between the per-record voter and the list endpoint. ### Per-record path (correct) `src/Voter/TimesheetVoter.php:138`: ```php if (!$this->permissionManager->checkTeamAccessTimesheet($subject, $user)) { return false; } return $this->permissionManager->hasRolePermission($user, $permission . '_other_timesheet'); ``` `checkTeamLeadAccess` (RoleP

GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. FIRST EPSS

  2. vendor patch

    The original advisory lists fixed boundaries 2.57.0 for kimai/kimai. Confirm the publisher’s latest guidance.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-4m8q-55qv-9pwp ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

  2. GHSA-4m8q-55qv-9pwp ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database via OSV · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub-origin advisory, CC-BY-4.0; OSV is an aggregate copy, not independent corroboration.

  3. CVE-2026-52819 ↗

    FIRST EPSS · official catalog

    Observed . FIRST EPSS; probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, not local compromise. Dataset date/model retained; FIRST services terms apply.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 4 ·

    Dated EPSS estimate updated; this is not a new disclosure or proof of exploitation.

  2. Revision 3 ·

    Source facts changed; compare the preserved prior revision.

  3. Revision 2 ·

    Dated EPSS estimate updated; this is not a new disclosure or proof of exploitation.

  4. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗