CVE-2025-36230
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 · uneditedIBM Aspera Faspex 5 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.1 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 confidenceIBM Aspera Faspex 5 versions 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.1 contains an HTML injection vulnerability that allows remote attackers to inject malicious HTML code into web pages served by the application. When victims view the crafted content, the injected HTML executes within the security context of the hosting site, potentially leading to session hijacking, credential theft, or defacement.
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>= 5.0.0, < 5.0.14.2CVSS 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.
-
Locate the installed version of IBM Aspera FaspexAccess the Faspex administration interface and navigate to the About or System Information page. Alternatively, check the version using the faspex CLI tool if available: 'faspex --version' or inspect the installation manifest files in the application directory.Affected if The displayed version falls within 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.1
-
Verify the web application is accessibleConfirm that the Faspex web interface is reachable by accessing the base URL (typically https://your-faspex-host/faspex) in a browser. HTML injection vulnerabilities affect only users who interact with the web-facing application.Affected if The web interface is active and users can log in to view content
-
Identify exposed user input fieldsLog into Faspex as a standard user and examine common input areas: the file transfer description/comment fields, user profile fields (display name, email), package metadata, and any messaging or notes fields.Affected if User-controllable input fields exist in the web interface that could accept and store arbitrary HTML content
-
Check for existing injection artifacts in logsReview Faspex server logs (typically located in the logs/ directory under the Faspex installation) for unusual HTML or script tags in user-submitted fields, particularly in transfer history or package metadata entries.Affected if Logs contain unexpected HTML tags (<script>, <iframe>, <img>, etc.) in user input fields, indicating possible exploitation attempts
You are affected if your installed IBM Aspera Faspex version is 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.1 and the web interface is active with user-accessible input fields.
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 · scoped5.0.14.2
Apply the vendor patch when available; until then, implement strict input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied fields to prevent HTML injection. Consider deploying a WAF rule to detect and block injection attempts.
5.0.14.2 or later
- Verify current Aspera Faspex version by accessing the admin console or checking the installed package
- Review current system backup and ensure recent data backups are completed
- Schedule maintenance window for the upgrade procedure
- Download Aspera Faspex version 5.0.14.2 or later from IBM Aspera official channels
- Stop Aspera Faspex services before initiating the upgrade
- Run the upgrade installer following standard IBM Aspera installation procedures
- After upgrade completion, verify that services start successfully
- Log into the admin console and confirm the version displays as 5.0.14.2 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-36230 — 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-2025-36230 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