CVE-2025-46940
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 where low-privileged attackers can inject malicious JavaScript into form fields. The malicious payload persists in the system and executes when other users view pages containing the compromised 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 versionNavigate to the AEM welcome page and check 'Version' under 'Platform Information', or run the command: curl -s http://localhost:4502/crx/packmgr/service.jsp?cmd=version | grep -i 'crx'Affected if Version is 6.5.22 or earlier, or version is before 2025.5.0 (and not 6.5.23.0 or later)
-
Determine if Forms or custom form fields are in useCheck the AEM Forms UI at /aem/forms.html or inspect the repository under /content/forms for custom form definitions, or query the CRX/DE Lite at /crx/de/index.jsp for nodes under /libs/fd or /apps/fdAffected if AEM Forms or custom form components are configured and accessible to low-privileged users
-
Inspect form submission data for injected scriptsUse CRX/DE Lite to browse form submission nodes under /content/forms/submissions, or check the Granite DataStore for any form field values containing script tags, script URLs, or javascript: handlersAffected if Form data contains unsanitized HTML/JavaScript in form field values that could execute when rendered
-
Verify low-privileged user access to form authoringLog in as a user with minimal permissions (e.g., 'forms-user' group) and attempt to create or edit a form via the Adaptive Forms editor at /aem/forms.html/create/adaptive-formAffected if Low-privileged users can access and modify form fields without admin rights
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 AND you have Forms or custom form fields exposed to low-privileged users who can inject malicious scripts that persist in the system.
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 Adobe's security patch by upgrading to Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23 or later. Additionally, implement output encoding and input validation on form fields as a defense-in-depth measure until the patch is applied.
6.5.23.0 or later (6.5 branch); or 2025.5.0 or later (2025 branch)
- Identify the current Adobe Experience Manager version running in the environment
- Determine which release branch is in use (6.5.x or 2025.x)
- Plan an upgrade to the appropriate fixed version: 6.5.23.0 or later for the 6.5 branch, or 2025.5.0 or later for the newer branch
- Create a complete backup of the current AEM instance including repository, configuration, and custom code
- Test the upgrade in a non-production/staging environment to verify compatibility
- Execute the upgrade following Adobe's official AEM upgrade documentation
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the AEM version in the About Adobe Experience Manager page
- Confirm the XSS vulnerability is no longer present by reviewing the security patch notes for the new version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46940 — 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-2025-46940 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