CVE-2025-40708
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 · uneditedCross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in OpenAtlas v8.9.0 from the Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage (ACDH-CH), due to inadequate validation of user input when a POST request is sent. The vulnerabilities could allow a remote user to send specially crafted queries to an authenticated user and steal their session cookie details, via the "/insert/event" petition, "name" parameter.
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 confidenceA stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in OpenAtlas v8.9.0 at the '/insert/event' endpoint where the 'name' parameter in POST requests does not properly validate or sanitize user input. An attacker can inject malicious JavaScript that executes in authenticated users' browsers, enabling session cookie theft.
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= 8.9.0CVSS 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 OpenAtlas installationCheck if OpenAtlas web application is running by accessing the base URL of the server and looking for OpenAtlas login page or application interfaceAffected if OpenAtlas software is deployed on the server
-
Verify installed versionCheck the application version typically found in the software documentation, about page, or configuration files. In OpenAtlas, the version is often displayed in the UI footer or can be found in installation filesAffected if Installed version is exactly 8.9.0 (Craws Openatlas)
-
Confirm endpoint accessibilityVerify that the /insert/event endpoint exists and is reachable. Try accessing it via browser or sending a GET request to [base_url]/insert/eventAffected if The endpoint is accessible and responds to requests
-
Check authentication statusDetermine whether authentication is required to access the /insert/event endpoint. Check if the application requires login before allowing event creationAffected if Authenticated access is possible and users can access event creation functionality
-
Identify name parameter handlingExamine the POST request handling for the /insert/event endpoint. Review how the 'name' parameter is processed - check if it accepts user-supplied input and stores it without sanitizationAffected if The 'name' parameter accepts unsanitized input and stores it in the application database
A user is affected if running OpenAtlas version 8.9.0 and the /insert/event endpoint with the 'name' parameter is accessible to authenticated users without proper input validation.
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.
From vendor dataImplement robust input validation and output encoding for the 'name' parameter at the '/insert/event' endpoint. Additionally, configure Content-Security-Policy headers to provide defense-in-depth against XSS attacks.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,816.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-40708 — 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-2025-40708 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