dbcve.org
Aspera FaspexApplication · Ibm

CVE-2025-33138

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-05-22
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 5.0.12.1 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.0 through 5.0.12 is vulnerable to HTML injection. A remote attacker could inject malicious HTML code, which when viewed, would be executed in the victim's Web browser within the security context of the hosting site.

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 confidence

IBM Aspera Faspex versions 5.0.0 through 5.0.12 contains an HTML injection vulnerability where user-supplied input in web interface fields is not properly sanitized or encoded, allowing attackers to inject malicious HTML scripts that execute in victims' browsers within the application's security context.

MitigationUpgrade to IBM Aspera Faspex version 5.0.13 or later. Until then, implement input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied data fields and consider deploying a WAF as a compensating control.

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
Aspera FaspexApplication
Affected:>= 5.0.0, < 5.0.12.1

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
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 checks

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

  1. Identify installed IBM Aspera Faspex version
    Access the Faspex admin interface or check the installation directory for version information. On Linux, you can also run 'faspex --version' or check '/opt/aspera/faspex/etc/faspex.yml' for version details. Alternatively, access the web UI and look for version info in the About or System Information page.
    Affected if The version is 5.0.0 through 5.0.12 (versions before 5.0.12.1)
  2. Confirm web interface is enabled and accessible
    Verify the Faspex web service is running by checking the service status (e.g., 'service faspex status' or accessing https://your-faspex-host/faspex in a browser). The HTML injection vulnerability requires the web interface to be accessible.
    Affected if The Faspex web interface is accessible and operational
  3. Verify presence of user input fields in web interface
    Log into the Faspex web UI and navigate to common input areas such as: package creation forms, user profile settings, metadata fields, package descriptions, or transfer request forms. These are the fields where HTML injection could occur.
    Affected if User-accessible input fields exist in the web interface where unsanitized HTML could be injected

You are affected if IBM Aspera Faspex version is between 5.0.0 and 5.0.12 and the web interface with user input fields is accessible.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 5.0.12.1 or later
Fixed in 5.0.12.1
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to IBM Aspera Faspex version 5.0.13 or later. Until then, implement input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied data fields and consider deploying a WAF as a compensating control.

Recommended fix High confidence

5.0.12.1

  1. Confirm the currently installed IBM Aspera Faspex version
  2. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
  3. Back up the current Aspera Faspex configuration and any critical data
  4. Upgrade IBM Aspera Faspex to version 5.0.12.1 or later
  5. After upgrade, verify the new version number matches 5.0.12.1 or higher
  6. Test that the application functions correctly after the upgrade

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Aspera Faspex Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-33138 — 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-2025-33138 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