CVE-2025-62247
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 · uneditedMissing Authorization in Collection Provider component in the Liferay Portal 7.4.0 through 7.4.3.132, and Liferay DXP 2025.Q2.0 through 2025.Q2.9, 2025.Q1.0 through 2025.Q1.16, 2024.Q4.0 through 2024.Q4.7, 2024.Q3.1 through 2024.Q3.13, 2024.Q2.0 through 2024.Q2.13, 2024.Q1.1 through 2024.Q1.19 allows instance users to read and select unauthorized Blueprints through the Collection Providers across instances.
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 confidenceMissing authorization check in Liferays Collection Provider component allows authenticated instance users to read and select Blueprints from other instances they should not have access to, enabling cross-instance data exposure.
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>= 2024.q1.1, < 2024.q1.20>= 2024.q2.0, <= 2024.q2.13>= 2024.q3.1, <= 2024.q3.13>= 2024.q4.0, <= 2024.q4.7>= 7.4.0, <= 7.4.3.132CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 Liferay versionAccess Liferay's Control Panel > Configuration > Server Administration, or inspect the portal-ext.properties file, or check the OSGi bundle version informationAffected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: 2024.q1.1 to 2024.q1.20, 2024.q2.0 to 2024.q2.13, 2024.q3.1 to 2024.q3.13, 2024.q4.0 to 2024.q4.7, or 7.4.0 to 7.4.3.132
-
Confirm Collection Provider component is accessibleNavigate to the Collections UI in Liferay (Content > Collections) and verify the Collection Provider selector is available to authenticated usersAffected if The Collection Provider selection interface is exposed to authenticated users in the current instance
-
Verify multi-instance configurationCheck the Liferay control panel for multiple virtual instances (Instance configuration in System Settings or Control Panel > Instance Configuration)Affected if More than one virtual instance exists in the Liferay deployment and users can switch between or access content from multiple instances
-
Review user instance permissionsAs an authenticated user with standard instance access, attempt to access Blueprints or Collections from a different instance using the Collection Provider, or audit user role assignments in Control Panel > Users and RolesAffected if Users assigned to one instance can view, select, or reference Blueprints, Collections, or Content Set items that belong to a different instance
You are affected if your Liferay version is within the affected ranges AND the Collection Provider feature is accessible to authenticated users operating in a multi-instance environment.
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 · scoped2024.q1.20
Apply the appropriate Liferay patch or upgrade to a fixed version that implements proper authorization validation in the Collection Provider to enforce instance isolation.
Lifter Specific version constraints indicate moving to 7.4.3.132+ or later ray Portal 7.4.3.132+ / DXP 2024.Q1.20+ / DXP 2024.Q2.14+ / DXP 2024.Q3.14+ / DXP 2024.Q4.8+ / DXP 2025.Q1.17+ / DXP 2025.Q2.10+
- 1. Identify the exact Lifecycle/DXP version currently deployed by checking the portal-admin control panel or the osgi/state/version.properties file
- 2. For Liferay Portal 7.4.x users: upgrade to version 7.4.3.132 or later (7.4.3.u132+)
- 3. For DXP 2024.Q1.x users: upgrade to version 2024.Q1.20 or later
- 4. For DXP 2024.Q2.x users: upgrade to version 2024.Q2.14 or later
- 5. For DXP 2024.Q3.x users: upgrade to version 2024.Q3.14 or later
- 6. For DXP 2024.Q4.x users: upgrade to version 2024.Q4.8 or later
- 7. For DXP 2025.Q1.x users: upgrade to version 2025.Q1.17 or later
- 8. For DXP 2025.Q2.x users: upgrade to version 2025.Q2.10 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62247 — 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-2025-62247 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