CVE-2025-55249
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 Missing Security Response Headers vulnerability. The absence of standard security headers may weaken the application’s overall security posture and increase its susceptibility to common web-based attacks.
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 · moderate confidenceHCL AION is missing standard security response headers (such as X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Content-Security-Policy, or Strict-Transport-Security) in HTTP responses. This configuration weakness allows browsers to behave more permissively, increasing exposure to content-sniffing attacks, clickjacking, cross-site scripting, and man-in-the-middle attacks.
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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
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 HCL AION installation versionLocate the installed HCL AION version using your system package manager, product documentation, or version file within the application installation directoryAffected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.0
-
Capture an HTTP response from the applicationSend a request to any endpoint of the HCL AION application (such as the homepage or login page) and capture the response headers using a tool like curl -I or browser developer toolsAffected if You are testing an HCL AION 2.0.0 instance
-
Check for Strict-Transport-Security headerInspect the HTTP response headers for the presence of Strict-Transport-SecurityAffected if The header is absent from all responses
-
Check for X-Content-Type-Options headerInspect the HTTP response headers for the presence of X-Content-Type-OptionsAffected if The header is absent from all responses
-
Check for X-Frame-Options headerInspect the HTTP response headers for the presence of X-Frame-OptionsAffected if The header is absent from all responses
-
Check for Content-Security-Policy headerInspect the HTTP response headers for the presence of Content-Security-PolicyAffected if The header is absent from all responses
You are affected if the installed HCL AION version is 2.0.0 and one or more of these security headers (Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Content-Security-Policy) are missing from HTTP responses.
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 the web server or application framework to include recommended security headers in all HTTP responses. Common headers include Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Content-Security-Policy.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-55249 — 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-2025-55249 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