CVE-2025-47035
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. The malicious payload persists in the system and executes when 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 versionAccess the AEM Welcome page or check the product version via the system console at /system/console/configMgr/org.apache.sling.commons.log.LogManagerFactory.config, or run: curl -s -u admin:password http://localhost:4502/crx/packmgr/service.jsp?cmd=versionAffected if The version is earlier than 6.5.23.0 or earlier than 2025.5.0 (for cloud/2024 releases)
-
Locate custom form componentsSearch the AEM repository at /apps for custom components containing form fields: run find /apps -name '*.xml' -exec grep -l 'form' {} \; or inspect the CRX/DE at /apps for any custom components that extend core form componentsAffected if Custom form components exist in /apps without proper output encoding validation
-
Inspect form submission data for malicious payloadsQuery the AEM repository for stored XSS patterns in form data: use the Query Builder API at /bin/querybuilder.json?type=nt:base&property=jcr:content/*&property.value=%3Cscript%3E or search repository nodes containing common XSS vectors like <script, javascript:, onload=, onerror=Affected if Form submission nodes contain unsanitized HTML or JavaScript payloads
-
Review custom component JSP/HTL for output encodingExamine custom form component files (HTL, JSP, orSightly templates) in /apps for presence of encoding context: search for ${properties.value} without @context='html' or out.escape() calls, or check if custom components use unencoded output in form field valuesAffected if Custom form components output user-supplied values without proper @context='html' encoding or equivalent escaping
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 AND you have custom form components that accept user input without 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 Adobe Experience Manager update 6.5.23 or later to patch the stored XSS vulnerability; additionally implement output encoding and input validation on custom form components as defense-in-depth.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 or later for the 6.5.x release line; Adobe Experience Manager 2025.5.0 or later for the 2025.x release line
- Back up the current AEM instance and all content repositories before proceeding with any upgrade
- Review the official Adobe Experience Manager release notes for version 6.5.23.0 (or 2025.5.0 for the 2025.x release line) to understand new features and changes
- Test the upgrade in a non-production/staging environment to verify compatibility with custom code and integrations
- Apply the upgrade to production environments after successful testing
- Verify that the XSS vulnerability is resolved by attempting to inject script content into form fields that were previously vulnerable
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47035 — 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-2025-47035 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