CVE-2025-41104
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 · uneditedHTML injection vulnerability found in Fairsketch's RISE CRM Framework v3.8.1, which consist of an HTML code injection due to lack of proper validation of user inputs by sending a POST request in parameter 'custom_field_1' in '/estimate_requests/save_estimate_request'.
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 confidenceAn HTML injection vulnerability exists in RISE CRM Framework v3.8.1 where the 'custom_field_1' POST parameter in the '/estimate_requests/save_estimate_request' endpoint lacks proper input validation, allowing injection of arbitrary HTML code.
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< 3.9CVSS 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 the installed RISE CRM versionAccess the application admin panel and navigate to Settings > General or look for a version identifier in the footer/login page. Alternatively, check the application configuration files for a version string.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 3.9 (e.g., 3.8.1, 3.8.0, etc.)
-
Verify the Estimate Requests module is enabledLog in as administrator and navigate to Settings > Modules or Settings > Permissions to confirm the 'Estimate Requests' or 'Estimate Request' module is active for your user role.Affected if The Estimate Requests module is enabled and accessible to your user account
-
Confirm custom_field_1 is configurableNavigate to Settings > Custom Fields or the Estimate Request settings area to verify that custom fields (specifically custom_field_1) can be created or edited.Affected if Custom fields are enabled and custom_field_1 exists or can be added to estimate requests
-
Locate the save_estimate_request endpointInspect the application's routing configuration or use browser developer tools to confirm the /estimate_requests/save_estimate_request endpoint handles POST requests for estimate request data.Affected if The endpoint is accessible and processes POST parameters including custom_field_1
You are affected if your RISE CRM version is below 3.9 AND the Estimate Requests module with custom_field_1 support is enabled and accessible to your users.
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 · scoped3.9
Implement robust input validation and output encoding on the custom_field_1 parameter to sanitize user-supplied data before rendering.
3.9
- Upgrade Rise Ultimate Project Manager to version 3.9 or later to resolve the HTML injection vulnerability in the custom_field_1 parameter
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-2025-41104 — 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-2025-41104 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