CVE-2025-46948
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. When victims browse to pages containing the compromised fields, the injected script executes in their browsers.
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 the installed AEM versionAccess the AEM system information page at /system/console/status-productinfo or check the version from the AEM start screen and jar file naming convention. Compare this version number against the affected ranges: versions below 6.5.23.0 and versions below 2025.5.0Affected if The installed AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0
-
Locate form components in the AEM environmentReview the AEM content structure under /content or /apps for Adaptive Form components, Form containers, or custom form field components that accept user input. Identify the form field components used in your pages.Affected if Forms with input fields exist in the AEM instance, particularly Adaptive Forms or form containers that handle user-submitted data
-
Check form field configuration for input validationInspect the form field component configuration in AEM (via CRXDE Lite at /apps or through the AEM Forms UI) to determine whether the form fields have proper input validation rules and output encoding configured. Look for fields without explicit validation or sanitization settings.Affected if Form fields lack proper input validation or output encoding configuration, making them potentially vulnerable to script injection
-
Review stored form data for malicious scriptsQuery the AEM repository (via CRXDE Lite or the Query Builder) for form submission data stored under /content/forms or /var/analytics and examine whether any field values contain script tags (such as <script>, javascript:, or event handlers like onerror, onload).Affected if Form submission data in the repository contains unsanitized script tags or JavaScript event handlers in field values
A defender is affected if their AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 AND the environment contains form fields that accept user input without proper validation and 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 Adobe security patch for AEM 6.5.22 or later, and implement proper input validation and output encoding on all form fields to prevent script injection.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 (or later) / AEM Cloud Service 2025.5.0 (or later)
- Review current Adobe Experience Manager installation and confirm current version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0
- Backup the AEM instance including repository, configuration, and custom code
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Download Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 (or later) from the official Adobe distribution or Software Distribution portal
- Follow Adobe's official upgrade documentation for the target version
- Test the upgrade in a non-production environment first
- Deploy the upgrade to production during the maintenance window
- Verify the XSS vulnerability is resolved by testing the previously vulnerable form fields
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46948 — 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-2025-46948 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