CVE-2025-52628
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 · uneditedHCL AION is affected by a Cookie with Insecure, Improper, or Missing SameSite vulnerability. This can allow cookies to be sent in cross-site requests, potentially increasing exposure to cross-site request forgery and related security risks. This issue affects AION: 2.0.
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 confidenceHCL AION 2.0 sets cookies without a proper SameSite attribute, allowing browsers to send these cookies in cross-site requests. This exposes the application to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks where malicious sites can trigger authenticated actions on behalf of users.
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= 2.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Verify HCL AION versionCheck the installed version of HCL AION in your environment (typically via application metadata, about page, or installation directory) and compare it to version 2.0.0Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.0
-
Inspect cookie headers in HTTP responsesUse browser developer tools (Network tab) or a proxy tool to capture HTTP responses from the HCL AION application. Examine Set-Cookie headers for the SameSite attributeAffected if Any Set-Cookie header is missing the SameSite attribute (or the attribute is absent entirely)
-
Review application cookie configurationCheck application configuration files or source code that handles cookie creation to see if SameSite is explicitly set on cookiesAffected if Cookies are being set without a SameSite attribute defined in the configuration or code
You are affected if you are running HCL AION version 2.0.0 and the application sets cookies without the SameSite attribute in their headers or configuration.
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.
From vendor dataConfigure all cookies to include the SameSite attribute set to 'Strict' or 'Lax' mode in the application code or server configuration to prevent cookies from being sent in cross-site requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-52628 — 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-2025-52628 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