CVE-2025-34316
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 · uneditedIPFire versions prior to 2.29 (Core Update 198) contain a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that allows an authenticated attacker to inject arbitrary JavaScript code through the txt_mailuser and txt_mailpass parameters when updating the mail server settings. When a user updates the mail server, the application issues an HTTP POST request to /cgi-bin/mail.cgi and the username and password are provided in the txt_mailuser and txt_mailpass parameters. The values of these parameters are stored and later rendered in the web interface without proper sanitation or encoding, allowing injected scripts to execute in the context of other users who view the affected mail configuration.
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 confidenceIPFire before Core Update 198 contains a stored XSS vulnerability in the mail server configuration page. An authenticated attacker can inject arbitrary JavaScript via the txt_mailuser and txt_mailpass parameters in POST requests to /cgi-bin/mail.cgi. These values are stored and rendered in the web interface without sanitization or encoding, causing the injected script to execute in the browsers of other users who view the mail configuration.
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< 2.29= 2.29CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 IPFire versionAccess the IPFire web admin interface and check the System page for the Core Update version number, or run 'cat /etc/os-release' on the console to see the installed versionAffected if The installed version is less than 2.29 or exactly 2.29 (Core Update 198)
-
Verify mail CGI existsConfirm that /cgi-bin/mail.cgi exists on the IPFire system by checking the filesystem or attempting to access it via the web interface at https://[ipfire-ip]/cgi-bin/mail.cgiAffected if The mail.cgi script is present and accessible on the system
-
Check mail server configuration accessLog into the IPFire web admin panel and navigate to the mail server configuration page (Services > Mail Server) to confirm the feature is enabled and configurableAffected if The mail configuration page is accessible to authenticated users
-
Review stored mail configuration valuesIf you have access to the IPFire configuration database, examine stored values for txt_mailuser and txt_mailpass parameters in the mail settings for any unexpected script tags or JavaScript patternsAffected if The stored mailuser or mailpass values contain unsanitized HTML or JavaScript content
You are affected if your IPFire version is 2.29 or any version before Core Update 198, and the mail server configuration interface is accessible in your environment.
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 · scoped2.29
Upgrade to IPFire 2.29 (Core Update 198) or later which properly sanitizes and encodes mail server parameters before rendering. If immediate patching is not possible, restrict administrative access to the mail configuration interface.
2.29 (Core Update 198)
- 1. Back up the current IPFire configuration via the web interface (System > Backup) or console.
- 2. Access the IPFire web interface at https://<ipfire-ip>:444/
- 3. Navigate to the update section (System > Update)
- 4. Check for and apply available updates. Ensure the system updates to version 2.29 (Core Update 198) or later.
- 5. After the update completes, verify the system is running the fixed version via the web interface (System > Status).
- 6. Log in and navigate to the mail server settings (Network > Mail Server) to confirm the settings page loads correctly.
- 7. Verify that the txt_mailuser and txt_mailpass fields in the mail server configuration are now properly sanitized when rendered.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-34316 — 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-2025-34316 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