CVE-2024-52843
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 · high confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.21 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form fields, which persists in the system. When legitimate users subsequently browse to pages containing these compromised form fields, the malicious 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.
-
Identify the installed Adobe Experience Manager versionAccess the AEM Welcome page or use the system console to view the version number. The version is typically displayed on the AEM start page or can be retrieved via the /system/console/bundles or /crx/packmgr/service.jsp endpoints.Affected if The installed version is earlier than 6.5.22.0 or earlier than the 2024.11.0 release.
-
Locate form components that accept user inputReview the AEM Forms or Adaptive Forms implementations in your content repository under /content or /apps. Identify any form field components that may not have input validation configured.Affected if Unvalidated or improperly sanitized form fields exist in the AEM instance that allow arbitrary JavaScript input.
-
Inspect stored form data for suspicious contentQuery the AEM repository (using CRXDE Lite or the Query tool) for form submissions stored in the repository under /content/forms or similar data storage locations. Look for entries containing script tags, javascript: URLs, or event handler attributes in input fields.Affected if Form data entries contain encoded or plain JavaScript code in input fields that could execute when rendered.
-
Review Content Services or Form Data Model configurationsIf using AEM Forms Data Integration, examine the Form Data Model (FDM) configurations and check whether input fields are mapped to data sources without server-side validation rules.Affected if Form data models or services lack input validation constraints on fields that store data persistently.
Your environment is affected if the installed AEM version is before 6.5.22.0 or before 2024.11.0 AND you have form fields that accept user input without proper validation or output encoding configured.
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 vendor patch. Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding for all form fields as a defense-in-depth measure.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.22.0 or 2024.11.0
- Review Adobe Experience Manager release notes for versions 6.5.22.0 and 2024.11.0 to understand new features and changes
- Schedule and plan the upgrade in a non-production environment first
- Perform a complete backup of the current AEM instance including repository, database, and configurations
- Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.22.0 (for 6.5.x line) or 2024.11.0 (for cloud/2024 releases)
- Validate that the upgrade was successful and test critical workflows
- Deploy the upgraded version to production after validation in non-production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-52843 — 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-2024-52843 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