Enterprise Chat And EmailApplication · Cisco
CVE-2025-20310
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 in the web UI of Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email (ECE) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the interface. This vulnerability exists because the web UI does not properly validate user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by persuading a user of the interface to click a crafted link. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the affected interface or access sensitive, browser-based information. To successfully exploit this vulnerability, an attacker would need valid agent credentials.
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 confidenceA stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the web UI of Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email (ECE) due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An attacker stores malicious script code that executes when a user views the affected content, potentially allowing arbitrary script execution in the user's browser context or access to sensitive browser-based information. Exploitation requires tricking a valid agent user into clicking a crafted link.
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
Enterprise Chat And EmailApplication
< 12.6\(1\)ES11CVSS 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.
-
Identify Cisco ECE installationLocate the Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email installation directory or check system inventory/asset management for ECE presenceAffected if Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email is installed on the system
-
Determine installed ECE versionUse the product's built-in version check mechanism, administrative console, or consult documentation for your installation method to retrieve the current version numberAffected if The installed version is lower than 12.6(1)ES11
-
Verify web UI is accessibleConfirm the ECE web interface is enabled and reachable on your network by accessing the login URL or checking service configurationAffected if The web UI is enabled and exposed to users
-
Inspect web UI content for suspicious scriptsReview agent-facing pages or activity logs for unexpected script tags, HTML elements, or encoded content that may indicate stored XSS payloadsAffected if Malicious script code appears in web UI content or logs that was not authored by administrators
A user is affected if Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email is installed with a version below 12.6(1)ES11 and the web UI is accessible, allowing stored malicious scripts to execute in agent browsers.
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 · scoped12.6
Apply vendor patches from Cisco when available; implement robust input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied data in the web UI; consider implementing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers as a defense-in-depth measure.
12.6(1)ES11 or later
- 1. Identify the current version of Cisco Enterprise Chat and Email (ECE) installed in your environment
- 2. Plan and schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- 3. Back up the current ECE configuration and database following Cisco backup procedures
- 4. Upgrade Cisco ECE to version 12.6(1)ES11 or a later released version using Cisco's official upgrade documentation
- 5. Verify the upgrade completed successfully by checking the system version
- 6. Confirm the web UI is accessible and the vulnerability is remediated
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Enterprise Chat And Email
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 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 $4,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20310 — 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-2025-20310 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