CVE-2025-34402
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 FieldCc parameter of /Mondo/lang/sys/Forms/AddressBook.aspx. The FieldCc value is not properly sanitized when processed via a GET request and is reflected inside a <script> block in the JavaScript variable var CCFieldProvided. By supplying a crafted payload that terminates the existing LoadCurAddresses() function, inserts attacker-controlled script, and comments out remaining code, a remote attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in a victim’s browser when the victim attempts to send an email. 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 prior to 10.54 contain a reflected XSS vulnerability in the FieldCc parameter of /Mondo/lang/sys/Forms/AddressBook.aspx. The FieldCc GET parameter value is not sanitized and is directly reflected into a JavaScript variable (var CCFieldProvided) inside a <script> block, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript by terminating the existing function and commenting out the rest.
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 versionLocate the MailEnable installation and check the version number. This is typically visible in the MailEnable Administrator console under the server name, or may be listed in installed programs. Compare your version to 10.54.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 10.54 (e.g., 10.53, 10.50, older).
-
Verify the vulnerable page existsCheck if the web application responds at the path /Mondo/lang/sys/Forms/AddressBook.aspx. This is typically hosted on port 8080 or 443 depending on your configuration. Attempt to access this endpoint via HTTP request.Affected if The AddressBook.aspx page is accessible and returns a valid HTTP response.
-
Confirm FieldCc parameter handlingSend a test request to the AddressBook.aspx page with a benign FieldCc parameter value (e.g., ?FieldCc=test) and examine the response. Inspect the page source to see if the CCFieldProvided JavaScript variable reflects your input directly without encoding or escaping.Affected if The FieldCc parameter value is reflected unescaped into the JavaScript variable CCFieldProvided within a <script> block.
You are affected if your MailEnable version is below 10.54 and the /Mondo/lang/sys/Forms/AddressBook.aspx page is accessible with the FieldCc parameter reflecting unsanitized input into the page 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 should contain the fix for this XSS vulnerability. As a temporary mitigation, implement input validation and proper JavaScript context encoding for the FieldCc parameter.
10.54
- Download MailEnable version 10.54 from the official MailEnable website (mailenable.com) or your licensed download portal
- Backup your current MailEnable configuration, mail data, and registry settings before proceeding
- Stop the MailEnable services (MailEnable Service, SMTP, POP3, IMAP) to ensure a clean upgrade process
- Run the MailEnable 10.54 installer and follow the on-screen upgrade instructions
- After installation completes, verify that services start successfully
- Confirm the upgrade by checking the MailEnable version in the administration console or about dialog
- Test the /Mondo/lang/sys/Forms/AddressBook.aspx page to verify the FieldCc parameter is now properly sanitized and no longer reflects unsanitized input into JavaScript variables
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-34402 — 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-2025-34402 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