CVE-2025-46610
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 · uneditedARTEC EMA Mail 6.92 allows CSRF.
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 · moderate confidenceARTEC EMA Mail version 6.92 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability that allows attackers to induce authenticated users to perform unintended actions. The high CVSS score (8.8) indicates that the CSRF could lead to significant unauthorized operations within the email management system.
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= 6.92CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed version of Artec EMAAccess the administration interface or check system inventory for Artec It Enterprise Mail Archive version number. Typically found in About or System Information section of the web UI, or via installed packages list.Affected if Version is exactly 6.92 (this specific version is affected)
-
Confirm web interface is enabledVerify that the ARTEC EMA web management interface is accessible and in use. CSRF attacks target web-facing authentication mechanisms.Affected if Web interface is active and users authenticate to it - only then can CSRF attacks be attempted
-
Inspect forms for anti-CSRF tokensLog into the EMA web interface, navigate to state-changing sections (user management, email settings, archive configuration), and view the HTML source of forms. Look for hidden input fields containing tokens or check if requests include anti-CSRF token parameters.Affected if Forms lack anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer tokens) in state-changing operations - indicates vulnerability is present
-
Check cookie SameSite attributesUsing browser developer tools or a proxy, inspect cookies set by the EMA application during authentication. Look for SameSite attribute on session cookies.Affected if Session cookies lack SameSite=Strict or SameSite=Lax attributes - increases exploitability of CSRF
Environment is affected if Artec EMA version is exactly 6.92 and the web interface is in use without proper anti-CSRF token protection on forms or SameSite cookie attributes.
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 anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations and configure SameSite cookie attributes to prevent CSRF attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46610 — 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-2025-46610 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