dbcve.org
Cross-site Scripting (XSS)Weakness · CWE-79

CVE-2025-40899

HIGH · 8.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
93/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable

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 · unedited
A Stored Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability was discovered in the Assets and Nodes functionality due to improper validation of an input parameter. An authenticated user with custom fields privileges can define a malicious custom field containing a JavaScript payload. When the victim views the Assets or Nodes pages, the XSS executes in their browser context, allowing the attacker to perform unauthorized actions as the victim, such as modify application data, disrupt application availability, and access limited sensitive information.

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 confidence

A stored cross-site scripting vulnerability exists in the Assets and Nodes functionality where improper validation of custom field input allows an authenticated user with custom fields privileges to inject malicious JavaScript code. This payload executes in victim browsers when viewing Assets or Nodes pages, enabling session hijacking, data modification, or sensitive information disclosure.

MitigationImplement strict input validation and output encoding for all custom field values rendered in Assets and Nodes pages to prevent XSS execution.

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
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:H

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify product and version with custom fields functionality
    Determine the exact product name and installed version. Cross-reference this version against any available release notes or security advisories that mention CVE-2025-40899.
    Affected if The product has Assets/Nodes with custom fields capability and the version matches the affected range described in the CVE.
  2. Verify custom fields feature is enabled
    Locate the product configuration or settings panel. Check whether custom fields functionality for Assets or Nodes modules is currently activated in the system settings.
    Affected if Custom fields are enabled for Assets or Nodes modules in the product configuration.
  3. Check for existing custom field definitions
    Access the custom fields administration area (typically found under Assets or Nodes settings). List all defined custom fields to determine if any have been created.
    Affected if One or more custom fields are defined and configured for Assets or Nodes.
  4. Verify user privileges for custom field management
    Review user role permissions or access control settings. Determine which authenticated users have create/edit permissions for custom fields.
    Affected if Authenticated users have privileges to create or modify custom field definitions or values.
  5. Inspect custom field input validation
    Create or edit a custom field entry in Assets or Nodes. Submit a test payload containing HTML or JavaScript characters (<script>alert(1)</script>) to observe if input is validated or sanitized before storage.
    Affected if The system accepts and stores raw HTML or JavaScript in custom field values without sanitization or encoding.

Your environment is affected if the product has custom fields enabled for Assets/Nodes, users with custom field privileges can inject unsanitized input, and that input renders unescaped when Assets or Nodes pages are viewed.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict input validation and output encoding for all custom field values rendered in Assets and Nodes pages to prevent XSS execution.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-40899 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-40899 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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