CVE-2021-29046
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 · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Asset module's category selector input field in Liferay Portal 7.3.5 and Liferay DXP 7.3 before fix pack 1, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the _com_liferay_asset_categories_admin_web_portlet_AssetCategoriesAdminPortlet_title parameter.
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 confidenceReflected XSS vulnerability in LiferPortal 7.3.x Asset Categories Admin portlet where the _com_lifer_asset_categories_admin_web_portlet_AssetCategoriesAdminPortlet_title parameter is not properly sanitized, allowing injection of arbitrary JavaScript/HTML that executes in victim browsers.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 7.3= 7.3.5CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check LiferPortal versionAccess the LiferPortal control panel or check the bundle version to determine if it matches 7.3 or 7.3.5Affected if Installed version is 7.3 or 7.3.5 (for DXP or Portal edition)
-
Verify Asset Categories Admin portlet is deployedLog into the LiferPortal admin panel and navigate to Site Administration > Content & Data > Categories, or check for the presence of the Asset Categories Admin portlet in available portletsAffected if The Asset Categories Admin portlet is present and accessible in the LiferPortal instance
-
Confirm portlet is accessible to usersNavigate to the portlet using the URL pattern containing _com_lifer_asset_categories_admin_web_portlet_AssetCategoriesAdminPortlet_title or access it through the LiferPortal UI as a portal userAffected if The portlet is accessible and the vulnerable title parameter can be submitted
-
Test for reflected XSS in title parameterSubmit a crafted payload such as <script>alert(1)</script> in the title parameter of the Asset Categories Admin portlet and observe if it reflects back in the response without sanitizationAffected if The submitted JavaScript/HTML payload is reflected unescaped in the page response
You are affected if running LiferPortal 7.3 or 7.3.5 with the Asset Categories Admin portlet enabled and the vulnerable title parameter reflects unsanitized input.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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.
From vendor dataApply Liferfix pack 1 for DXP 7.3 or upgrade to a patched version; implement input validation and output encoding on the category title parameter as defense-in-depth.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,992.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-29046 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2021-29046 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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