CVE-2025-41746
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 · uneditedAn XSS vulnerability in pxc_portSecCfg.php can be used by an unauthenticated remote attacker to trick an authenticated user to send a manipulated POST request to the device in order to change parameters available via web based management (WBM). The vulnerability does not provide access to system-level resources such as operating system internals or privileged functions. Access is limited to device configuration parameters that are available in the context of the web application. The session cookie is secured by the httpOnly Flag. Therefore an attacker is not able to take over the session of an authenticated user.
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 reflected XSS vulnerability in the pxc_portSecCfg.php file allows unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious scripts via manipulated POST requests that trick authenticated users into submitting. The attack modifies device configuration parameters accessible through web-based management but cannot access OS internals, privileged functions, or hijack sessions due to httpOnly-protected cookies.
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< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50< 3.50CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 device model and firmware versionAccess the web-based management interface and navigate to System > Information or use the device's CLI to retrieve the exact model number and firmware version. Compare against the affected versions listed (all versions < 3.50).Affected if The device is a Phoenixcontact Fl Switch 2406 2sfx Pn, 2408, 2408 Pn, 2412 2tc 2sfx, 2414 2sfx, 2414 2sfx Pn, 2416, or 2416 Pn with firmware version less than 3.50.
-
Verify web management interface accessibilityConfirm the device's web-based management interface is reachable on the network (typically HTTP/HTTPS on ports 80 or 443). The vulnerability requires an authenticated user to submit a manipulated POST request.Affected if The web management interface is exposed and accessible on the network.
-
Locate the vulnerable pxc_portSecCfg.php fileAccess the device's web interface and attempt to locate or access the pxc_portSecCfg.php script. This file handles port security configuration parameters.Affected if The pxc_portSecCfg.php file exists and is accessible through the web management interface.
-
Test for reflected XSS in POST parametersUsing an authenticated session, submit a POST request to pxc_portSecCfg.php with a test payload in the configuration parameters (such as <script>alert('XSS')</script>) and observe if the input is reflected back without proper encoding.Affected if User-supplied parameters in pxc_portSecCfg.php are reflected in the response without sanitization or encoding.
A user is affected if they are running any of the listed Phoenixcontact Fl Switch models with firmware version below 3.50 and the web management interface is accessible, with the pxc_portSecCfg.php file reflecting unsanitized user input.
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 · scoped3.50
Implement proper input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied parameters in pxc_portSecCfg.php to prevent XSS. Consider adding CSRF tokens for POST requests to prevent request manipulation.
Firmware version 3.50 or later for the affected FL Switch models (2406 2sfx Pn, 2408, 2408 Pn, 2412 2tc 2sfx, 2414 2sfx, 2414 2sfx Pn, 2416, 2416 Pn)
- Identify the specific FL Switch model from the affected product list (2406 2sfx Pn, 2408, 2408 Pn, 2412 2tc 2sfx, 2414 2sfx, 2414 2sfx Pn, 2416, or 2416 Pn)
- Check the current firmware version of the device through the web-based management (WBM) interface or console
- Obtain firmware version 3.50 or later from the vendor's official support website or through certvde.com reference
- Review the vendor's firmware upgrade documentation for the specific device model
- Apply the firmware upgrade following the vendor's recommended procedure (typically via WBM firmware upload or TFTP)
- After upgrade, verify the device is running firmware version 3.50 or later
- Confirm the pxc_portSecCfg.php page is no longer vulnerable to XSS by testing with the vendor's security advisory
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-41746 — 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-2025-41746 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