CVE-2025-46986
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. A low-privileged attacker can inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form fields, which persists in the system and executes in victim users' browsers when they view the affected page.
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.
-
Check installed AEM versionNavigate to AEM Welcome page > Tools > Operations > Configuration, or access /system/console/configmgr and look for the Product Version information. Alternatively, check the crx-quickstart/package.properties file for the version number.Affected if The installed version is 6.5.22 or earlier, or any version below 2025.5.0 (the patched releases are 6.5.23.0 and 2025.5.0 or later)
-
Identify form components in useReview your AEM instance for deployed Adaptive Forms, Core Components Form containers (core/wcm/components/form/), or custom form implementations. Check under /content and /apps directories for form-related content components and their configurations.Affected if Form components that accept user input are present and publicly accessible without additional input validation layers
-
Inspect form field input validation settingsOpen Form container or Field component configurations in AEM Forms or Core Components. Check the validation patterns, allowed values, and whether server-side input validation is enabled. Review the submit action configurations under /conf or /apps for form submission handlers.Affected if Form fields lack server-side validation rules, have weak regex patterns, or accept raw HTML/script content without sanitization
-
Search repository for suspicious script contentUse AEM Query Builder or CRXDE Lite (search under /content) to query for common XSS payloads. Look for patterns like <script>, javascript:, onerror=, onload=, and other event handlers in text fields. Example query: type=nt:unstructured&path=/content&1_property=jcr:content&1_property.value=<scriptAffected if Any stored content contains script tags or JavaScript event handlers in form-submitted fields that were not properly encoded before storage
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 AND you have form components accepting user input without proper server-side validation, as evidenced by malicious script content stored in your repository.
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 to a patched version of Adobe Experience Manager (6.5.23 or later). Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding on form fields, and deploy Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS execution.
AEM 6.5.23.0 or later; AEM 2025.5.0 or later
- 1. Back up the current AEM instance and all content repositories
- 2. Download Adobe Experience Manager version 6.5.23.0 or later (for 6.5.x line) or version 2025.5.0 or later from the official Adobe distribution site
- 3. Review the Adobe Experience Manager upgrade documentation for your specific version path
- 4. Test the upgrade in a non-production environment before applying to production
- 5. Deploy the fixed version following standard AEM upgrade procedures
- 6. Verify that the XSS vulnerability is remediated by testing the affected form fields
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46986 — 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-2025-46986 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