CVE-2025-46895
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 · uneditedAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.
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 confidenceA stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier allows low-privileged authenticated users to inject malicious JavaScript into form fields. The malicious payload persists in the system and executes in the browsers of other users who view pages containing the compromised form fields.
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< 6.5.23.0< 2025.5.0CVSS 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 installed AEM versionAccess the AEM Welcome page or check the product version through the system console at /system/console/bundles, or run: curl -s -u admin:password http://localhost:4502/crx/packmgr/service.jsp?cmd=versionAffected if The installed version is 6.5.22 or earlier, or any version below 2025.5.0 (for cloud/flexible releases)
-
Verify if Forms or Adaptive Forms module is in useCheck the AEM package manager at /crx/packmgr/index.jsp for installed form-related packages, or navigate to /libs/fd/fpm to see if Forms Portal Manager is presentAffected if Form modules are installed and exposed to low-privileged user access
-
Identify form fields accepting user-submitted contentReview form components under /apps or /libs that accept user input, particularly in content fragments, experience fragments, or custom form containers accessed via the Sites consoleAffected if Form components exist that allow unauthenticated or low-privileged user input without output encoding
-
Inspect stored form data for suspicious contentQuery the AEM repository (CRX/DE) at /content or use Query Builder to search for form submissions: http://localhost:4502/bin/querybuilder.json?path=/content&type=nt:unstructured&property=jcr:title&property.value=%3Cscript%3EAffected if Any stored XSS payloads exist in form field repositories or JCR nodes
The environment is affected if the installed AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0, AND form fields that accept user input are exposed to low-privileged users without input validation or output encoding.
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 · scoped6.5.23.02025.5.0
Apply the vendor patch (upgrade to AEM 6.5.23 or later). As a compensating control, implement strict input validation and output encoding on all form fields that handle user-submitted content.
AEM 6.5.23.0 or later; AEM as a Cloud Service 2025.5.0 or later
- Verify current Adobe Experience Manager version by navigating to the AEM welcome page and checking 'Version' information
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade process
- Back up the current AEM instance including repository, database, and configuration files
- For AEM 6.5.x deployments: Upgrade to AEM 6.5.23.0 or later by applying the latest Service Pack
- For AEM as a Cloud Service deployments: Ensure the environment is on release 2025.5.0 or later
- After upgrade, verify the patch was applied successfully by checking the AEM version information
- Test critical form workflows to confirm functionality remains intact
- Clear browser cache and test that the XSS fix is effective by attempting to inject script content in vulnerable form fields
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,720.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46895 — 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-2025-46895 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