CVE-2025-46905
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 · high confidenceA stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier allows low-privileged attackers to inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form fields. The malicious payload persists in the system and executes in victims' browsers when they view pages containing the affected 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 AEM versionAccess the AEM About page at /libs/granite/ui/content/shell/about.html or check the version file in the installation directory. You can also use the AEM Web Console at /system/console/bundles to view the version information.Affected if The installed version is 6.5.22 or earlier, or any version below 2025.5.0 (for early release branches). The About page displays version numbers like '6.5.22' or '2024.x.x'.
-
Identify form components in useReview the AEM Forms implementation by navigating to the Forms section in AEM Assets or checking the CRX/DE repository at /content/forms for any published or draft adaptive forms, or /libs/fd/af for form components.Affected if Adaptive Forms, Foundation Forms, or custom form components are created and published.
-
Inspect form field XSS protectionsExamine the form field component configurations in CRX/DE (at /apps or /content) to check if input validation patterns are defined and if output encoding is enforced. Look for properties like 'validationPattern' or custom validation scripts.Affected if Form fields lack input validation patterns or do not explicitly use AEM's built-in output encoding mechanisms (such as the 'text' or 'html' property settings in form components).
-
Scan stored content for injected scriptsUse AEM Query Builder or search the repository under /content for suspicious script tags or JavaScript URI patterns (such as <script>, javascript:, or event handlers like onerror/onload) within form field content nodes.Affected if Any form submissions or stored form data contain malicious script payloads, appearing as HTML markup within text fields or form data nodes.
You are affected if your AEM version is 6.5.22 or earlier (or below 2025.5.0), and you have published form components without proper input validation where an attacker could inject and persist malicious scripts.
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
Update Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.23 or later to obtain the security patch. Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding for all form fields, and consider deploying Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS attacks.
Upgrade to AEM 6.5.23.0 or later, or AEM 2025.5.0 or later
- Review Adobe Experience Manager upgrade documentation for your current version
- Ensure your environment meets the system requirements for the target version
- Test the upgrade in a non-production environment before deploying to production
- Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.23.0 or later, or to version 2025.5.0 or later
- After upgrade, verify that the XSS vulnerability is resolved by testing form fields that could be impacted
- Deploy the upgraded version to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46905 — 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-2025-46905 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