CVE-2025-47027
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 confidenceStored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier allows low-privileged attackers to inject malicious JavaScript into form fields. When users view pages containing these compromised fields, the 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.
-
Determine installed AEM versionAccess the AEM Web Console Product Info page at /system/console/status-productinfo, or check the version.info file in the crx-quickstart directoryAffected if The installed version is 6.5.22 or earlier, or any version below 2025.5.0 (for the 2025 release track)
-
Identify custom form components in useReview the AEM Components console (Tools > General > Components) and identify any custom form field components that may have been created beyond the out-of-the-box AEM Forms componentsAffected if Custom form components are deployed that may not implement proper input validation or output encoding
-
Check form field output encoding configurationInspect the HTL (HTML Template Language) templates or JSP scripts for form field components in /apps, looking for whether variables are being rendered using context-aware HTL attributes (such as ${properties.myField @ context='html'}) or raw outputAffected if Form field templates are rendering user-supplied values without proper context-aware encoding (for example, using raw ${variable} syntax instead of context='html' or similar)
-
Review stored form data for potential XSS payloadsQuery the AEM repository (via CRXDE Lite at /crx/de or using Query Builder) for form submission content in /content or /var, searching for patterns like <script, javascript:, or event handlers in stored field valuesAffected if Form submission data contains unsanitized script tags or event handler attributes in stored field values
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 AND you have custom form fields that render user input without proper 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
Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.23 or later to apply the vendor patch. Alternatively, implement input validation and output encoding on vulnerable form fields as a compensating control.
6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 (or later)
- 1. Back up your current Adobe Experience Manager instance and content repository before proceeding with the upgrade.
- 2. Download Adobe Experience Manager version 6.5.23.0 or later (or version 2025.5.0 or later for the 2024 release line) from the official Adobe distribution portal.
- 3. Review the Adobe Experience Manager Upgrade Planning documentation for your specific version path.
- 4. Execute the upgrade following the standard AEM upgrade procedure: stop the current instance, run the upgrade installer on the author and publish tiers, validate content migration, and restart the services.
- 5. After upgrade, verify that the vulnerable form fields no longer accept and store unsanitized script content.
- 6. Clear browser caches and test that the XSS fix is functioning by attempting to inject a benign script tag into the affected form fields.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $4,704.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47027 — 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-2025-47027 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