CVE-2025-46935
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 confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in form fields. A low-privileged authenticated attacker can inject malicious JavaScript payloads into vulnerable input fields, which are then stored and executed in the browsers of subsequent users who view the affected pages.
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.
-
Determine installed AEM versionAccess the AEM System Information console (usually at /system/console/status) or check the crx-quickstart/package VERSION file. Alternatively, check the product version via the AEM Welcome page or Package Manager.Affected if The installed version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 (for the respective release tracks).
-
Identify deployed formsReview the AEM content structure under /content or /apps for form components. Use CRXDE Lite or the search feature to locate any form-related content or custom form components that accept user input.Affected if Forms exist that collect and display user-submitted data.
-
Audit form field components for output encodingExamine custom form field components in /apps for proper server-side output encoding (such as using Encode.forHtml or similar encoding functions) before rendering user input back to the page. Check the HTL/Sightly templates (.html files) for these components.Affected if Form field components render user input without proper HTML encoding or use raw output (e.g., ${userInput} without encoding).
-
Review low-privilege user permissions on formsUse the AEM User Administration console to check which user groups have create, modify, or publish permissions on form content or form components. Look for permissions on paths containing form-related content.Affected if Low-privileged users (e.g., content authors without admin rights) have permissions to create or edit form fields.
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 AND you have forms in use that render user input without proper output encoding, allowing an authenticated low-privilege user to inject 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
Apply the vendor patch for CVE-2025-46935 to AEM 6.5.22 or later. Until patched, implement output encoding on form field outputs and consider restricting low-privileged user permissions to form creation/editing.
AEM 6.5.23.0 or later, or AEM as a Cloud Service 2025.5.0 or later
- Identify the current Adobe Experience Manager version running in the environment
- Plan an upgrade to AEM 6.5.23.0 or later (for on-premise) or to AEM as a Cloud Service 2025.5.0 or later
- Review Adobe's official release notes and upgrade documentation for the target version
- Test the upgrade in a non-production environment before deploying to production
- Perform a complete backup of the current AEM instance
- Execute the upgrade following Adobe's official upgrade procedures
- After upgrading, verify that the XSS vulnerability is resolved and all functionality works as expected
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46935 — 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-2025-46935 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