CVE-2024-26104
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 · uneditedAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.19 and earlier are affected by a reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. If an attacker is able to convince a victim to visit a URL referencing a vulnerable page, malicious JavaScript content may be executed within the context of the victim's browser.
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 confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.19 and earlier contain a reflected XSS vulnerability where malicious JavaScript can be injected into URL parameters. When a victim clicks a crafted URL pointing to a vulnerable AEM page, the malicious script executes within their browser context, potentially stealing session cookies or performing actions on behalf of the user.
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< 6.5.20.0< 2024.3.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 AEM version via web consoleAccess the AEM Web Console at /system/console/status-productinfo to view the installed product version. The version number is displayed as a build number (for example, 6.5.19.0 or 2024.2.0).Affected if The displayed build version is below 6.5.20.0 for the 6.5.x branch or below 2024.3.0 for the 2024 release branch
-
Check version via installation fileLocate the version.properties file in the crx-quickstart directory or within the AEM jar installation folder. Open the file and read the 'product.version' or 'build.number' property.Affected if The version property shows a number less than 6.5.20.0 or less than 2024.3.0 depending on the release line
-
Identify if URL parameter handling is exposedDetermine if the AEM instance handles external URL parameters in any published or author-facing components. Check for custom components that read request.getParameter() values and render them into HTML output without encoding.Affected if The application processes URL query parameters and reflects them in the HTTP response without proper output encoding
-
Check Content Security Policy headersInspect the HTTP response headers from the AEM instance using browser developer tools or a tool like curl -I <aem-url>. Look for Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options headers.Affected if No CSP header is present, or the CSP allows inline script execution (unsafe-inline), providing no defense against reflected XSS
A user is affected if their AEM installation version is 6.5.19.x or earlier in the 6.5.x line, or any version below 2024.3.0 in the 2024 release line, and URL parameters are processed by the application.
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 · scoped6.5.20.02024.3.0
Apply the vendor-provided patch (AEM 6.5.20 or later) to resolve the vulnerability. Additionally, implement input validation on URL parameters and configure Content Security Policy headers to mitigate XSS risks.
AEM 6.5.20.0 (or later service pack) for on-premise; AEM as a Cloud Service 2024.3.0 or later
- Identify your current Adobe Experience Manager deployment type (6.5.x on-premise or AEM as a Cloud Service)
- For AEM 6.5.x on-premise: Upgrade to version 6.5.20.0 or later by installing the latest service pack from Adobe's Software Distribution portal
- For AEM as a Cloud Service: Upgrade to version 2024.3.0 or later through the Cloud Manager pipeline
- After upgrading, validate that the reflected XSS vulnerability is no longer present by testing the previously vulnerable endpoints
- Ensure your application's custom code is compatible with the new version before deploying to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-26104 — 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-2024-26104 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