CVE-2021-29048
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 Layout module's page administration page in Liferay Portal 7.3.4, 7.3.5 and Liferay DXP 7.2 before fix pack 11 and 7.3 before fix pack 1 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the _com_liferay_layout_admin_web_portlet_GroupPagesPortlet_name 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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Liferay Portal/DXP's Layout module allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the _com_lifera_layout_admin_web_portlet_GroupPagesPortlet_name parameter on the page administration page.
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= 7.2= 7.3= 7.3.4= 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.
-
Identify the Lifer Portal/DXP versionLog into the Control Panel and navigate to Configuration > Server Administration > Product Information, or check the portal.properties file for the version propertyAffected if The version is Lifer Portal 7.3.4, 7.3.5, or any Lifer DXP 7.2 or 7.3 version
-
Confirm the Layout module is deployedCheck for the presence of the com_lifer_layout_admin_web_portlet_GroupPagesPortlet module in the OSGi console (Gogo shell: 'lb | grep GroupPagesPortlet')Affected if The GroupPagesPortlet bundle is active in the OSGi runtime
-
Verify access to page administrationNavigate to Site Administration > Pages > Page Administration, or check if the _com_lifera_layout_admin_web_portlet_GroupPagesPortlet resource is accessible to usersAffected if Users with page administration privileges can access the GroupPagesPortlet interface
-
Inspect the name parameter handlingSubmit a test request to the page administration endpoint with a benign script tag in the _com_lifera_layout_admin_web_portlet_GroupPagesPortlet_name parameter and observe if it is reflected unescaped in the responseAffected if The parameter value is returned in the HTML response without encoding or sanitization
You are affected if your Lifer Portal/DXP version falls within 7.3.4, 7.3.5, or any DXP 7.2/7.3 release AND the GroupPagesPortlet is accessible to users who can modify page names.
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 the appropriate fix packs (fix pack 11 for DXP 7.2, fix pack 1 for DXP 7.3) or implement input validation/sanitization on the name parameter in the GroupPagesPortlet.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-29048 — 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-2021-29048 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