CVE-2024-36193
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 6.5.20 and earlier 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 · high confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.20 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability where malicious scripts can be injected into form fields. When victims browse to pages containing these compromised fields, the injected JavaScript executes in their 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< 6.5.21< 2024.5CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Verify AEM versionAccess the AEM System Information console at /system/console/status-productinfo or check the version.properties file in the crx-quickstart directory. Confirm the version number is below 6.5.21 or below 2024.5.Affected if Installed version is lower than 6.5.21 or lower than 2024.5
-
Identify custom form componentsReview the /apps and /libs directories for custom form components (particularly those extending foundation/components/form or using Granite UI form fields). List all custom form xtypes or resource types in the codebase.Affected if Custom form components exist that may not have input validation implemented
-
Audit form field input validationExamine the JSP, HTL, or Java code for custom form components. Check whether server-side validation (org.apache.sling.validation) or output encoding (such as escaping HTL @ context='html' or encodeForHTML) is applied to user-submitted form field values before rendering.Affected if Form fields lack proper input validation or output encoding logic in their rendering code
-
Review stored form data for XSS payloadsQuery the JCR repository (using CRXDE Lite query tool or curl against the Query Servlet) for stored form values containing script tags, javascript:, or HTML event handlers in the /content nodes. Example query: //element(*, nt:unstructured) containing 'script'Affected if Form submission data in the repository contains unsanitized script tags or event handler attributes
Your environment is affected if you are running AEM version 6.5.20 or earlier (or version prior to 2024.5) AND have custom form components without input validation that store user-submitted content.
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 · scoped6.5.212024.5
Implement input validation and output encoding on all form fields to neutralize malicious script content. Consider adding Content-Security-Policy headers as an additional layer of defense.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.21 (LTS) or Adobe Experience Manager 2024.5 (yearly release)
- Identify your current Adobe Experience Manager version by checking the AEM About page or version.properties file
- If running AEM 6.5.x release train: Plan upgrade to AEM 6.5.21 or later
- If running the yearly release train (e.g., 2024.x): Plan upgrade to 2024.5 or later
- Review Adobe's official security bulletin (helpx.adobe.com) for detailed upgrade instructions
- Perform upgrade in a non-production environment first to validate compatibility
- Test critical workflows and form submissions after upgrade to confirm functionality
- Deploy the upgraded version to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36193 — 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-2024-36193 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