CVE-2025-59752
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 · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability reflected in AndSoft's e-TMS v25.03. This vulnerability allows an attacker to execute JavaScript code in the victim's browser by sending them a malicious URL. The relationship between parameter and assigned identifier is 'l, demo, demo2, TNTLOGIN, UO and SuppConn' parameters in '/clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP'.
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 confidenceA reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in AndSoft e-TMS v25.03 allows attackers to inject malicious JavaScript through the 'l, demo, demo2, TNTLOGIN, UO, and SuppConn' parameters in the login form at /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP. When victims click a crafted URL, the unsanitized input is reflected back and executed in their browser context.
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= 25.03CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm AndSoft e-TMS installationCheck the application for AndSoft e-TMS branding or headers. Look at the login page at /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP to verify this is an AndSoft e-TMS instance.Affected if The application is AndSoft e-TMS and responds on the /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP endpoint.
-
Verify product version is 25.03Check the application's version information through the login page source, About page, or HTTP headers. Compare the installed version against the affected range (25.03).Affected if The installed version is exactly 25.03.
-
Identify vulnerable parameter exposureAccess the login form at /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP and inspect the HTML form to confirm it accepts the parameters: l, demo, demo2, TNTLOGIN, UO, or SuppConn.Affected if The login form accepts any of these six parameters (l, demo, demo2, TNTLOGIN, UO, SuppConn) without sanitization.
-
Test for reflected XSS behaviorSubmit a benign test payload (such as <script>alert(1)</script>) via one of the affected parameters in a crafted URL to /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP and observe if the payload is reflected unsanitized in the response.Affected if The submitted payload is reflected back in the HTML response without encoding or sanitization.
You are affected if you are running AndSoft e-TMS version 25.03 with the login form at /clt/LOGINFRM_LXA.ASP accessible and the vulnerable parameters (l, demo, demo2, TNTLOGIN, UO, SuppConn) reflect unsanitized input in the response.
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 dataImplement proper input validation and output encoding for all user-supplied parameters in the affected login form. Additionally, deploy Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to provide defense-in-depth against XSS attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-59752 — 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-2025-59752 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