CVE-2025-59900
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 · uneditedSync Breeze Enterprise Server v10.4.18 and Disk Pulse Enterprise v10.4.18 contain a persistent authenticated Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. An attacker could send malicious content to an authenticated user and steal information from their session due to insufficient validation of user input in '/server_options?sid=', affecting the 'tasks_logs_dir', 'errors_logs_dir', 'error_notifications_address', 'status_notifications_address', and 'status_reports_address' parameters.
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 confidenceSync Breeze Enterprise Server v10.4.18 and Disk Pulse Enterprise v10.4.18 contain a persistent authenticated XSS vulnerability in the '/server_options?sid=' endpoint. Insufficient validation of user input in the 'tasks_logs_dir', 'errors_logs_dir', 'error_notifications_address', 'status_notifications_address', and 'status_reports_address' parameters allows injection of malicious scripts that execute in authenticated users' browsers, enabling session hijacking and information theft.
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= 10.4.18= 10.4.18CVSS 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 the installed Disk Pulse or Sync Breeze versionLaunch the application and navigate to Help > About, or check the Windows Programs and Features list for the exact version numberAffected if The installed version is exactly 10.4.18
-
Confirm the web server is runningAttempt to access the web interface via browser on the default port (typically 80 or 8080) at the /server_options endpointAffected if The web interface is accessible and responds to /server_options?sid= requests
-
Examine the current configuration values for vulnerable parametersNavigate to the server options page in the web interface and inspect the values for: tasks_logs_dir, errors_logs_dir, error_notifications_address, status_notifications_address, status_reports_addressAffected if Any of these fields contain unsanitized or potentially malicious script content that would execute when viewed by another user
A user is affected if they are running exactly version 10.4.18 of Disk Pulse Enterprise or Sync Breeze Enterprise and the web interface is accessible with unsanitized input present in the five vulnerable parameters.
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 affected parameters. Apply context-appropriate sanitization (HTML encoding, URL encoding) before rendering user-supplied data. Consider applying vendor patches when available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-59900 — 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-2025-59900 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