CVE-2025-62297
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 · uneditedSOPlanning is vulnerable to Stored XSS in /projets endpoint. Malicious attacker with medium privileges can inject arbitrary HTML and JS into website, which will be rendered/executed when opening edited page. This issue was fixed in version 1.55.
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 confidenceSOPlanning versions prior to 1.55 contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the /projets endpoint. An authenticated attacker with medium-level privileges can inject malicious HTML and JavaScript code into project data fields. This payload is stored in the database and executes in the browsers of other users who view the affected project pages.
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< 1.55.00CVSS 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.
-
Check the installed SOPlanning versionLocate the version file or admin panel version display. Common locations include a version.php file, the footer of admin pages, or a system info page. Compare the version number to 1.55.00.Affected if The installed version is earlier than 1.55.00 (for example, 1.54.00 or earlier).
-
Verify access to the /projets endpointAttempt to access the /projets URL path in the SOPlanning web interface. This endpoint handles project management and data entry.Affected if The /projets endpoint is accessible and returns a project management interface.
-
Identify user privilege levelCheck the current user's role or privilege level within SOPlanning. Look for medium-level privileges such as standard user, project manager, or similar roles that allow project data modification.Affected if The authenticated user has medium-level privileges that permit creating or editing project data.
-
Inspect project data fields for suspicious contentExamine the database tables related to projects (such as the projets table) or use the /projets interface to review stored project names, descriptions, and other data fields. Look for HTML tags, script tags, or JavaScript event handlers that appear malicious.Affected if Any project data fields contain injected HTML, script tags, or JavaScript code that was not entered by an administrator.
-
Check if project pages execute stored scriptsAccess the affected project pages as a different user (or in a test browser) and verify whether any stored JavaScript executes automatically when viewing project data.Affected if Viewing project pages causes stored JavaScript or HTML to execute in the browser without sanitization.
You are affected if SOPlanning version is earlier than 1.55.00, the /projets endpoint is accessible to medium-privilege users, and project data contains unsanitized scripts that execute when viewed by other users.
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 · scoped1.55.00
Upgrade to SOPlanning version 1.55 or later which contains the security patch. Alternatively, implement output encoding and input validation on the /projets endpoint as a compensating control until the upgrade can be completed.
1.55.00
- 1. Backup your current Soplanning installation and database before proceeding with the upgrade.
- 2. Navigate to the official Soplanning website (www.soplanning.org) and download version 1.55.00 or later.
- 3. Install or upgrade your Soplanning instance to the downloaded version following the standard upgrade procedures.
- 4. Verify that the /projets endpoint no longer executes injected HTML/JavaScript code.
- 5. Test that users with medium privileges can no longer inject arbitrary scripts through the affected functionality.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62297 — 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-2025-62297 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