CVE-2024-43725
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 6.5.21 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 · moderate confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.21 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability where malicious JavaScript can be injected into form fields and persisted. When victims browse to pages containing the compromised fields, the injected scripts execute 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< 6.5.22.0< 2024.11.0CVSS 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.
-
Determine installed AEM versionAccess the AEM Web Console (通常在 /system/console/configMgr 或 /crx/packmgr/service.jsp) or check the manifest file in the AEM installation directory. You can also query the version via the AEM SDK or crx-quickstart folder.Affected if The installed version is 6.5.21 or earlier, or falls between 6.5.22.0 and the latest version but is below 2024.11.0.
-
Verify if AEM Forms or Adaptive Forms is enabledCheck the AEM Web Console bundle status (system/console/bundles) for 'Forms' or 'Adaptive Forms' bundles, or inspect the package manager for AEM Forms packages.Affected if AEM Forms or Adaptive Forms modules are installed and active.
-
Inspect custom form field components for persistenceReview form-related content nodes in the CRX/DE repository (路径通常在 /content 或 /apps 下) where custom form components store user-submitted data. Look for unusual script tags or event handlers in field values.Affected if Custom form components store unsanitized input that could contain script tags or javascript: URIs.
-
Check form submission data in the repositoryQuery the repository for form submission content (通常在 /content/forms/af 或自定义提交路径下) and inspect stored values for HTML script elements, javascript: protocols, or event handler attributes.Affected if Any form submission data contains injected script content that is rendered without proper encoding.
Your environment is affected if the installed AEM version is below 6.5.22.0 or below 2024.11.0, and you have AEM Forms or custom form components that accept and persist user input without output 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 · scoped6.5.22.02024.11.0
Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.22 or later to obtain the security patch. Additionally, implement output encoding and input validation on form fields as a defense-in-depth measure.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.22.0 (on-premises) or AEM as a Cloud Service 2024.11.0
- Identify your current Adobe Experience Manager version (6.5.x or AEM as a Cloud Service)
- Review the Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.22 release notes for any migration requirements or known issues
- Test your custom code and configurations in a non-production environment before upgrading
- Perform a full backup of your AEM instance including the repository and database
- Upgrade AEM 6.5 on-premises installations to version 6.5.22.0 or later
- For AEM as a Cloud Service, ensure your environment is updated to the 2024.11.0 release or later
- After upgrade, verify that the XSS protection properly sanitizes input in all form fields
- Confirm that previously injected malicious scripts in stored form data are rendered harmless
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-2024-43725 — 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-2024-43725 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