CVE-2024-41843
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 in form fields. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript scripts into vulnerable form input fields, which gets stored in the system. When other users browse to pages containing these affected form fields, the malicious script 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.
-
Determine installed AEM versionNavigate to the AEM Welcome page or check the system/console info page to identify the exact AEM version number running in your environment.Affected if The installed version is earlier than 6.5.21 or earlier than the 2024.5 release.
-
Identify form implementations in useReview AEM instance for any deployed Adaptive Forms, Core Components with form fields, or custom form components that collect user input.Affected if Your AEM deployment uses form functionality where user-submitted data can be stored and later rendered to other users.
-
Inspect form field configurations for input validationExamine the form component configurations in AEM to determine whether input validation and output encoding settings are enabled on form fields.Affected if Form fields lack proper input validation or output encoding settings, allowing unsanitized content to be stored.
-
Review stored form submissions for malicious contentQuery the AEM repository (via CRXDE or content services) for form submission nodes and inspect stored values for script tags, javascript: handlers, or other XSS payloads.Affected if Form submission data contains unsanitized HTML, script tags, or event handler attributes that could execute in user browsers.
-
Verify if affected form pages are accessible to usersCheck which form-enabled pages are published and accessible to end users in the production environment.Affected if Vulnerable form pages are publicly accessible and could serve malicious stored scripts to browsing users.
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.21 or below 2024.5 AND your environment uses form functionality where untrusted input can be stored and displayed to other users without proper encoding.
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
Apply the vendor patch by upgrading to AEM 6.5.21 or later. Additionally, implement output encoding and Content Security Policy (CSP) headers as defense-in-depth measures for form-based inputs.
AEM 6.5.21 (for 6.5.x branch) or AEM 2024.5 (for cloud/2024 branch)
- 1. Backup your current AEM instance and content repository before proceeding with any upgrade.
- 2. Review Adobe's official upgrade documentation for your specific AEM version at helpx.adobe.com.
- 3. Ensure your system meets the minimum requirements for AEM 6.5.21 or AEM 2024.5.
- 4. Test the upgrade in a staging environment before deploying to production.
- 5. Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.21 or later for the 6.5.x branch, OR upgrade to version 2024.5 or later for the cloud release branch.
- 6. After upgrade, verify that the XSS vulnerability is remediated by testing form field inputs.
- 7. Deploy the upgraded version to production environment.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41843 — 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-2024-41843 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