CVE-2025-62249
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 · uneditedA reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Liferay Portal 7.4.0 through 7.4.3.132, and Liferay DXP 2025.Q3.0 through 2025.Q3.2, 2025.Q2.0 through 2025.Q2.12, 2025.Q1.0 through 2025.Q1.17, 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.Q1.20, and 2023.Q4.0 through 2023.Q4.10 allows an remote non-authenticated attacker to inject JavaScript into the google_gadget.
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 Limerick Portal and DXP allows unauthenticated remote attackers to inject malicious JavaScript via the google_gadget parameter. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation or output encoding when processing this parameter.
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>= 2023.q4.0, <= 2023.q4.10>= 2024.q1.1, < 2024.q1.21>= 2024.q2.0, <= 2024.q2.13>= 2024.q3.1, <= 2024.q3.13>= 2025.q1.0, < 2025.q1.18>= 2025.q2.0, <= 2025.q2.12>= 2025.q3.0, < 2025.q3.3>= 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
- 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.
-
Identify Liferay product and versionCheck the portal's version via the Control Panel > Configuration > Server Administration > Version, or inspect the liferay-portal.properties or manifest.mf file in the installation directoryAffected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: LDP 2023.q4.0-2023.q4.10, 2024.q1.1-2024.q1.21, 2024.q2.0-2024.q2.13, 2024.q3.1-2024.q3.13, 2025.q1.0-2025.q1.18, 2025.q2.0-2025.q2.12, 2025.q3.0-2025.q3.3; or Liferay Portal 7.4.0 to <7.4.3.132
-
Determine if google_gadget feature is enabledSearch the portal-ext.properties, portal-setup-wizard.properties, or system-ext.properties files for the property 'google.gadget.enabled' and check its value, or inspect the Google Gadget configuration in the Control Panel under Apps > App ManagerAffected if The google_gadget feature is enabled (property set to true or not explicitly disabled)
-
Test for vulnerable parameter reflectionSend a GET request to any portal page with the parameter 'google_gadget' set to a test payload such as '<script>alert(1)</script>' and observe if the parameter value is reflected unescaped in the responseAffected if The parameter value is reflected in the HTML response without proper encoding or validation
You are affected if your Liferay Portal or DXP version is within the affected ranges AND the google_gadget feature is enabled, which allows the vulnerable parameter to be processed.
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 · scoped7.4.3.1322024.q1.212025.q1.18
Apply proper input validation and output encoding to the google_gadget parameter, or disable the google_gadget functionality if not required.
Upgrade to the first fixed release above your current version (e.g., 7.4.3.132 for Portal, or the next quarterly patch for DXP)
- 1. Identify your current Lifter Portal or DXP version from the control panel or version file
- 2. For Lelter Portal 7.4.x users: Upgrade to version 7.4.3.132 or later
- 3. For DXP 2023.Q4.x users: Upgrade to version 2023.Q4.11 or later
- 4. For DXP 2024.Q1.x users: Upgrade to version 2024.Q1.21 or later
- 5. For DXP 2024.Q2.x users: Upgrade to version 2024.Q2.14 or later
- 6. For DXP 2024.Q3.x users: Upgrade to version 2024.Q3.14 or later
- 7. For DXP 2024.Q4.x users: Upgrade to version 2024.Q4.8 or later
- 8. For DXP 2025.Q1.x users: Upgrade to version 2025.Q1.18 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62249 — 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-2025-62249 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