CVE-2025-62986
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in FanBridge FanBridge signup fanbridge-signup allows Stored XSS.This issue affects FanBridge signup: from n/a through <= 0.6.
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 confidenceA CSRF vulnerability in the FanBridge signup component (fanbridge-signup <= 0.6) allows attackers to forge requests that store malicious XSS payloads in the signup form. When other users view the stored content, the injected scripts execute in their browsers, enabling session hijacking, credential theft, or defacement.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 if fanbridge-signup component is installedLocate the fanbridge-signup package in your application's node_modules, vendor directory, or dependency manifest (package.json, composer.json, etc.). Search for files named 'fanbridge-signup' or containing this module reference.Affected if The fanbridge-signup component exists in your environment and is actively serving signup functionality.
-
Determine the installed fanbridge-signup versionCheck the version field in the package.json, composer.json, or the version.js/version.json file within the fanbridge-signup module directory. Compare it against the affected range: versions 0.6 and below.Affected if The installed version is 0.6 or lower.
-
Inspect the signup form for CSRF protectionExamine the HTML source of the signup form endpoint. Look for a hidden input field containing a CSRF token (commonly named '_token', 'csrf_token', or 'csrfmiddlewaretoken') or verify that the form submission includes a token in the request headers.Affected if The signup form lacks a CSRF token mechanism (no hidden token field and no token validation on the server side).
-
Verify if stored signup data is output-encodedSubmit a test signup with a harmless payload such as '<script>alert(1)</script>' in a text field, then retrieve and view that stored data. Inspect the rendered HTML to see if the script tags appear as literal text or are rendered as harmless HTML entities.Affected if The XSS payload renders as executable JavaScript (triggers an alert or is parsed as HTML) rather than being encoded as <script>.
You are affected if fanbridge-signup version 0.6 or lower is installed and the signup form lacks CSRF tokens or fails to encode stored user input when displayed.
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 anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing operations including the signup form, validate Origin/Referer headers, and apply SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-site request forgery. Additionally, implement output encoding and Content Security Policy headers to mitigate the resulting XSS.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,568.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62986 — 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-2025-62986 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