CVE-2025-1618
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been found in vTiger CRM 6.4.0/6.5.0 and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the file /modules/Mobile/index.php. The manipulation of the argument _operation leads to cross site scripting. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 7.0 is able to address this issue. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.
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 confidenceReflected XSS vulnerability in vTiger CRM's mobile module. The _operation parameter in /modules/Mobile/index.php is not properly sanitized, allowing injection of malicious JavaScript through the URL. This is a classic reflected XSS issue where user-supplied input in the _operation argument is echoed back in the response without encoding.
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>= 6.4.0, < 7.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm vTiger CRM installationCheck for the presence of vtigercrm by examining the web root for vtiger CRM files, or access the application login page.Affected if vTiger CRM is installed and accessible on the server.
-
Identify the installed vTiger CRM versionLocate the version file or check the vtiger version constant - typically found in vtigerversion.php in the includes directory, or access /vtigercrm/ and look for version information in the login page footer.Affected if The installed version falls within >= 6.4.0 and < 7.0.
-
Verify mobile module accessibilityAttempt to access the /modules/Mobile/index.php endpoint via HTTP request (e.g., GET http://[host]/vtigercrm/modules/Mobile/index.php).Affected if The mobile module endpoint returns a 200 OK response, indicating it is enabled and accessible.
-
Test _operation parameter for XSS vulnerabilitySend a crafted request to /modules/Mobile/index.php with a test payload in the _operation parameter (e.g., ?_operation=<script>alert(1)</script>), then examine if the response reflects the unsanitized input.Affected if The response contains the raw _operation parameter value without HTML encoding, indicating the vulnerability is present.
-
Review web server logs for exploitation attemptsExamine HTTP access logs for requests to /modules/Mobile/index.php containing suspicious patterns in the _operation parameter, such as <script>, javascript:, or other XSS vectors.Affected if Log entries show unauthenticated requests with malicious payloads in the _operation parameter.
The environment is affected if vTiger CRM version 6.4.0 through 6.x (below 7.0) is installed, the mobile module is accessible, and the _operation parameter reflects unsanitized user input in responses.
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 · scoped7.0
Upgrade vTiger CRM from versions 6.4.0/6.5.0 to version 7.0, which contains the fix. Alternatively, implement input validation/sanitization on the _operation parameter as a temporary measure until the upgrade can be performed.
version 7.0
- Backup the existing Vtiger CRM database and files
- Review Vtiger 7.0 upgrade documentation for any pre-upgrade requirements
- Ensure the system meets the minimum requirements for version 7.0
- Perform a test upgrade in a staging environment first
- Execute the upgrade to Vtiger CRM version 7.0
- Verify the XSS vulnerability is resolved by testing the /modules/Mobile/index.php _operation parameter
- Confirm all core CRM functions work correctly after upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,160.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-1618 — 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-2025-1618 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