CVE-2025-34397
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 · uneditedMailEnable versions prior to 10.54 contain a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Message parameter of /Mobile/Compose.aspx. The Message value is not properly sanitized when processed via a GET request and is reflected into a JavaScript context in the response. By supplying a crafted payload that terminates the existing script block/function, injects attacker-controlled JavaScript, and comments out the remaining code, a remote attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in a victim’s browser when the victim opens the crafted reply URL. Successful exploitation can redirect victims to malicious sites, steal non-HttpOnly cookies, inject arbitrary HTML or CSS, and perform actions as the authenticated user.
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 confidenceMailEnable versions before 10.54 contain a reflected XSS vulnerability in /Mobile/Compose.aspx where the Message GET parameter is not sanitized before being reflected into a JavaScript context in the response. An attacker can craft a payload that terminates the existing script block, injects malicious JavaScript, and comments out remaining code to execute arbitrary scripts in victim browsers.
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< 10.54CVSS 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 MailEnable installation and versionCheck the MailEnable installation directory for version information. Common locations: C:\Program Files\MailEnable\BIN\MEPM.exe -v, or check the Windows Programs and Features list, or look at the assembly version of DLLs in the MailEnable bin folder.Affected if The installed version is below 10.54.
-
Confirm Mobile web interface is accessibleVerify that the /Mobile/ virtual directory or application exists under the MailEnable web mail path. Check IIS Manager or the file system at the MailEnable web mail root for a Mobile folder containing Compose.aspx.Affected if The /Mobile/Compose.aspx file exists and is accessible via the web server.
-
Test the Message parameter for reflected XSSSend a GET request to /Mobile/Compose.aspx with a test payload in the Message parameter, such as: /Mobile/Compose.aspx?Message=<script>alert(1)</script>. Examine the response HTML to see if the parameter value is reflected without proper encoding or sanitization.Affected if The Message parameter value is reflected unescaped into the HTML/JavaScript response, allowing script injection.
A user is affected if they are running any version of MailEnable below 10.54 AND have the Mobile web interface enabled, with the Message parameter reflecting unsanitized input into the response.
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 · scoped10.54
Upgrade to MailEnable version 10.54 or later, which contains the patch for this vulnerability. Until then, implement input validation on the Message parameter and ensure proper output encoding when reflecting user input into JavaScript contexts.
10.54
- Obtain MailEnable version 10.54 from the official MailEnable website (mailenable.com) or authorized distribution channels
- Back up the current MailEnable configuration, database, and any custom settings
- Stop MailEnable services before applying the upgrade
- Install MailEnable version 10.54 using the standard upgrade installation process
- Restart MailEnable services after the upgrade completes
- Verify the version has been updated to 10.54 or later
- Test that the /Mobile/Compose.aspx endpoint properly sanitizes the Message parameter and no longer reflects unsanitized input
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-34397 — 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-2025-34397 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