CVE-2025-23111
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in REDCap 14.9.6. It allows HTML Injection via the Survey field name, exposing users to a redirection to a phishing website. An attacker can exploit this to trick the user that receives the survey into clicking on the field name, which redirects them to a phishing website. Thus, this allows malicious actions to be executed without user consent.
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 confidenceREDCap 14.9.6 contains an HTML injection vulnerability in the Survey field name parameter. User-supplied input for survey field names is not properly sanitized or encoded before rendering, allowing an attacker to inject malicious HTML (including anchor tags with malicious href attributes). When survey recipients view the survey and click on the crafted field name, they are redirected to an attacker-controlled phishing website.
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= 14.9.6CVSS 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.
-
Determine REDCap versionLocate the version number in the REDCap admin interface (typically under Control Center > General Configuration) or check the /redcap/version.php file if accessible via server filesystemAffected if The installed version is exactly 14.9.6 (note: other versions may not be affected)
-
Confirm Survey module is enabledCheck if the Surveys & Locking module is enabled in the REDCap Control Center under Module Enterprise Features or by reviewing project-level survey settingsAffected if Surveys are enabled and projects are using survey instruments
-
Identify survey field configurationsReview survey instrument fields in projects that use surveys - look for any custom field names that may accept user-supplied inputAffected if Survey field names exist and the application renders these names without encoding
-
Inspect HTML response from survey pagesAccess a published survey and view the page source - examine how field labels/names are rendered in the HTMLAffected if The rendered HTML shows unescaped characters in field name display (look for raw < or > symbols instead of < >)
You are affected if running REDCap version 14.9.6 AND using surveys where field names can contain user-supplied input rendered without HTML 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.
From vendor dataApply vendor-supplied patch for CVE-2025-23111 (upgrade beyond 14.9.6). Until patch is available, implement input validation and output encoding for all survey field names at render time.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-23111 — 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-2025-23111 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