dbcve.org
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2025-31623

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-03-31
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
78/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in richtexteditor Rich Text Editor richtexteditor allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Rich Text Editor: from n/a through <= 1.0.1.

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 confidence

A CSRF vulnerability in richtexteditor Rich Text Editor <= 1.0.1 allows authenticated users to be tricked into submitting forged requests that inject malicious scripts, resulting in Stored XSS that executes when other users view the compromised content.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF token validation on all form submissions and state-changing operations within the Rich Text Editor, combined with SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-origin request forgery.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate richtexteditor installation
    Search your application codebase, dependencies (package.json, requirements.txt, composer.json), or web server directories for files or libraries named 'richtexteditor', 'rich-text-editor', or related components. Check for JavaScript/TypeScript files such as richtexteditor.js, richeditor.js, or associated CSS files.
    Affected if The richtexteditor component is found in your application dependencies or web directories.
  2. Identify installed version
    Examine the version declaration in your package.json (JavaScript/Node), requirements.txt (Python), pom.xml (Java), or the component's own version file. Compare the version number to the affected range: any version <= 1.0.1.
    Affected if The installed version is 1.0.1 or lower.
  3. Confirm editor is actively used
    Review your application's forms, admin panels, CMS, or content management interfaces to determine if the richtexteditor component is rendered and accepting user input. Search your templates/HTML for references to the editor initialization code.
    Affected if The richtexteditor is loaded and enabled on any user-facing or administrative input forms.
  4. Inspect form submissions for CSRF protection
    Examine the HTML source of pages containing the richtexteditor. Look for hidden CSRF token input fields or anti-CSRF headers in POST/PUT requests submitted through the editor. Use browser developer tools to inspect network requests when submitting content via the editor.
    Affected if No anti-CSRF token is present in the editor's form submissions, or the application does not validate tokens on state-changing operations.
  5. Verify content rendering sanitization
    Inspect the server-side code that processes and stores content submitted through the richtexteditor. Check if the application sanitizes or escapes HTML/JavaScript before storing and before rendering stored content to other users.
    Affected if Content submitted through the editor is stored and rendered to other users without sanitization, allowing script injection.

Your environment is affected if richtexteditor version 1.0.1 or lower is installed and actively used, and the application's form submissions lack CSRF token validation or content sanitization.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement anti-CSRF token validation on all form submissions and state-changing operations within the Rich Text Editor, combined with SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-origin request forgery.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,640
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31623 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-31623 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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