CVE-2025-62275
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 · uneditedBlogs in Liferay Portal 7.4.0 through 7.4.3.111, and older unsupported versions, and Liferay DXP 2023.Q4.0 through 2023.Q4.10, 2023.Q3.1 through 2023.Q3.10, 7.4 GA through update 92, and older unsupported versions does not check permission of images in a blog entry, which allows remote attackers to view the images in a blog entry via crafted URL.
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 confidenceThis is an authorization bypass vulnerability where Limerick Portal and DXP fail to perform permission checks when serving images embedded in blog entries. Attackers can access restricted images by directly constructing URLs to blog images without proper authentication or authorization validation.
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= 7.4= 2023.q3.1= 2023.q3.2= 2023.q3.3= 2023.q3.4= 2023.q3.5= 2023.q3.6= 2023.q3.7= 2023.q3.8= 2023.q3.9= 2023.q3.10= 2023.q4.0>= 7.4.0, < 7.4.3.112CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 Limerick Portal or DXP installed versionCheck the portal's version by reviewing the release.properties file in the Limerick installation directory, or access the Control Panel > Configuration > Server Administration > General to view the portal version.Affected if The installed version is 7.4.0 through 7.4.3.111, or matches 7.4, or any 2023.q3.x version through 2023.q3.10, or 2023.q4.0.
-
Verify blog image serving is enabledConfirm that the blog application module is deployed and that image attachments are allowed in blog entries via the Control Panel > Content & Data > Blogs > Configuration.Affected if Blog functionality is active and users can add images to blog posts.
-
Test direct image URL accessConstruct a test URL in the format /blogs/image/<filename> and attempt to access it from an unauthenticated browser session or via curl without providing session credentials.Affected if The image loads successfully without requiring authentication or authorization validation.
-
Inspect access logs for blog image requestsReview the Limerick access logs (typically in the /logs directory) for requests to /blogs/image/ paths that occur without prior authentication or with invalid session tokens.Affected if Log entries show successful GET requests to blog image URLs from unauthenticated sources.
If the portal runs an affected version AND blog images are accessible via direct URL construction without authentication, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2025-62275.
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 · scoped7.4.3.112
Apply the vendor-supplied patch or upgrade to a patched version. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider implementing URL access controls or web application firewall rules to restrict direct access to blog image paths while the patch is being deployed.
Liferay Portal 7.4.3.112 or later; Liferay DXP 2023.Q4.11 / 2023.Q3.11 / 7.4 update 93 or later
- 1. Identify the current Liferay Portal or DXP version by checking the liferay-portal.properties or the control panel About section
- 2. For Liferay Portal 7.4.x users: Plan upgrade to version 7.4.3.112 or later
- 3. For Liferay DXP users: Upgrade to one of the fixed releases - DXP 2023.Q4.11+, DXP 2023.Q3.11+, or DXP 7.4 update 93+
- 4. Before upgrading in production, test the upgrade in a staging environment to verify compatibility with custom modules and themes
- 5. Back up the database and file system before performing the upgrade
- 6. Deploy the new version and verify that blog images now properly enforce permission checks
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62275 — 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-2025-62275 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