CVE-2025-40846
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 · uneditedImproper Input Validation, the returnUrl parameter in Account Security Settings lacks proper input validation, allowing attackers to redirect users to malicious websites (Open Redirect) and inject JavaScript code to perform cross site scripting attack. The vulnerability affects Halo versions up to 2.174.101 and all versions between 2.175.1 and 2.184.21
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 confidenceThe returnUrl parameter in Halo's Account Security Settings lacks proper input validation, enabling attackers to redirect users to malicious sites (Open Redirect) and inject JavaScript code for Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Authentication
- Y
- User interaction
- A
- Scope
- P
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:P/AU:Y/R:U/V:X/RE:L/U:Red
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 Halo installationLocate the Halo application in your environment and determine its installation method (e.g., look for halo-specific directories, services, or web applications)Affected if Halo software is present in the environment
-
Determine Halo versionCheck the installed version of Halo by examining application metadata, about pages, or version files specific to the installation methodAffected if The installed version cannot be confirmed as patched or falls within an unpatched version range
-
Verify Account Security Settings accessNavigate to or enumerate the Account Security Settings module within the Halo administrative interfaceAffected if The Account Security Settings feature is enabled and accessible to users
-
Inspect returnUrl parameter handlingLocate HTTP requests or forms that contain the returnUrl parameter, typically during login, logout, or authentication-related workflowsAffected if The returnUrl parameter is present in requests and accepts user-controlled input
-
Test for Open Redirect vulnerabilitySubmit a returnUrl value pointing to an external domain (e.g., returnUrl=https://malicious-site.com) and observe if the application redirects users to the untrusted URLAffected if The application accepts and redirects to arbitrary external domains without validation
-
Test for XSS vulnerabilitySubmit a returnUrl value containing JavaScript payload (e.g., returnUrl=javascript:alert(1)) and observe if the script executes in the browserAffected if The application reflects the returnUrl value without proper encoding, allowing script execution
A user is affected if Halo is installed with an unpatched version and the Account Security Settings feature exposes a returnUrl parameter that permits arbitrary external redirects or unsanitized script injection.
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 strict allowlist-based validation for the returnUrl parameter, restricting it to trusted internal domains/paths, and apply proper output encoding to prevent XSS injection.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-40846 — 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-2025-40846 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