CVE-2021-44176
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 · uneditedAEM's Cloud Service offering, as well as version 6.5.10.0 (and below) are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by an attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.
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 · moderate confidenceAEM Cloud Service and version 6.5.10.0 and below contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in form fields. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript that executes in victim browsers when viewing pages with compromised form fields.
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<= 6.5.10.0all versionsCVSS 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 Adobe Experience Manager installation and versionCheck the AEM version by accessing the Help menu (Hamburger menu > Help > About Adobe Experience Manager) or by viewing the system console at /system/console/configMgr and looking for the org.apache.sling.engine.impl.SlingMainServlet bundle which displays the AEM version number.Affected if The installed version is 6.5.10.0 or lower, or the instance is AEM Cloud Service (any version).
-
Locate custom form field componentsSearch the AEM repository (CRXDE Lite at /apps) for custom form components. Look for nodes under /apps that extend core form components (such as granite/ui/components/coral/foundation/form/textfield or similar form field components) or custom form components you or your team may have created.Affected if Custom or extended form field components exist in the /apps directory that were not developed with input validation.
-
Inspect form field component code for input validationIn CRXDE Lite, examine the .html template files (like .html.esp or .hbs) and any associated Java or JavaScript code for your custom form components. Look for whether server-side input validation (using AEM's validation framework or custom logic) and output encoding are implemented before rendering user-submitted values.Affected if Form field components lack input validation logic and output encoding (such as escaping HTML entities) in their rendering code.
-
Check Content-Security-Policy header configurationUse browser developer tools (Network tab) or a command-line tool like curl to inspect the HTTP response headers when accessing AEM pages. Look for the Content-Security-Policy header and examine its configuration.Affected if Content-Security-Policy header is absent, not set, or configured with 'unsafe-inline' or 'unsafe-eval' directives that would allow XSS execution.
You are affected if your AEM version is 6.5.10.0 or below (or Cloud Service) AND custom form fields exist without input validation and output encoding, or CSP headers are missing or permissive.
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.
dbcve · scopedImplement input validation and output encoding on all form fields, and configure Content-Security-Policy headers to mitigate XSS execution.
AEM 6.5.11.0 or later (on-premise); Contact Adobe for Cloud Service patch timeline
- 1. Identify all AEM instances (both on-premise and Cloud Service) in your environment that are running version 6.5.10.0 or below.
- 2. For AEM on-premise instances: Plan an upgrade to AEM 6.5.11.0 or later to remediate the stored XSS vulnerability.
- 3. For AEM Cloud Service: Contact Adobe support or your Cloud Service representative to confirm when the security patch has been applied to your environment.
- 4. After upgrading, verify that the form fields previously identified as vulnerable no longer allow script injection.
- 5. Test the fix by attempting to inject a benign script payload (e.g., <script>alert('test')</script>) into the affected form fields to confirm the XSS is mitigated.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-44176 — 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-2021-44176 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