CVE-2025-47066
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 on the server and executes in victims' browsers when they 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 System Information console (typically at /system/console or via the Help menu > System Information) and note the version number displayedAffected if The version shown is 6.5.22 or earlier, or falls below 2025.5.0
-
Verify AEM version via package managerOpen the AEM Package Manager and locate the core-com.adobe.cq.social.cq-social-packages bundle, or check the installed AEM hotfixes in the crx/packmgr/service.jsp listingAffected if No hotfixes corresponding to version 6.5.23 or the 2025.5.0 release are installed
-
Review low-privilege user accessNavigate to AEM User Administration (Security > Users or /security/users.html) and enumerate users assigned only to low-privilege groups such as 'contributors' or 'content-authors'Affected if Low-privileged user accounts exist and have permissions to author or edit form-based content
-
Inspect form content for suspicious scriptsUse the AEM Query Builder or CRX/DE Lite (at /crx/de) to search content nodes under /content for any form fields containing script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributesAffected if Any content nodes under /content contain encoded or plain script tags or XSS-relevant markup in text fields
-
Check content authoring logsReview AEM error.log and access.log files (located in crx-quickstart/logs) for recent POST requests to form endpoints that include unusual character sequences often used in XSS payloadsAffected if Recent form submissions contain patterns matching common XSS injection attempts
A user is affected if their AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 AND low-privileged users can author form content where malicious scripts could be stored and served to other users.
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
Implement strict input validation and output encoding on all form fields in AEM, and update to a patched AEM version once available. Consider deploying Content Security Policy headers to mitigate XSS execution.
AEM 6.5.23.0 or AEM 2025.5.0 (whichever corresponds to your deployment track)
- Review the Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 release notes and migration considerations at helpx.adobe.com
- Back up your current AEM instance and content repository before proceeding
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.23.0 (for 6.x deployments) or 2025.5.0 (for cloud/2025 releases) following Adobe's official upgrade documentation
- After upgrade, verify the fix by testing that malicious scripts cannot be injected into form fields
- Confirm normal AEM functionality works as expected in your environment
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47066 — 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-2025-47066 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