CVE-2025-64590
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 · uneditedAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.
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 confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in form fields. A low-privileged attacker can inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form inputs, which persists in the system and executes in the browsers of other users who view the affected page.
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< 6.5.24.0< 2025.12.0= 6.5CVSS 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.
-
Identify installed AEM versionAccess the AEM Welcome page or the System Information console at /system/console/info to view the product version. Alternatively, locate the version.properties file in the crx-quickstart folder to read the installed version number.Affected if The installed version is 6.5.23 or earlier, or falls below 2025.12.0, or is listed as version 6.5 without the 6.5.24.0 patch applied.
-
Verify form field usageReview the AEM instance for any deployed forms that accept user input. Check Form components in the Touch UI (edit mode at /editor.html) or Classic UI that are published or accessible to low-privileged users.Affected if Form fields that accept user-submitted data are present and accessible without elevated permissions.
-
Inspect stored form data for malicious scriptsQuery the AEM content repository (via CRXDE Lite at /crx/de or the Query Builder) for any form submission content. Look for entries containing script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributes in form field values.Affected if Any stored form data contains unsanitized HTML or JavaScript payloads that could execute in a victim's browser.
-
Review Content Security Policy headersCheck the Apache Sling or Dispatcher configuration for Content-Security-Policy headers. Inspect the HTTP response headers of pages containing forms to see if CSP is defined.Affected if Content Security Policy headers are absent or do not include directives to block inline scripts (script-src 'self').
You are affected if your AEM version is 6.5.23 or earlier, below 2025.12.0, or unpatched 6.5, and you have accessible form fields that accept user input without sanitization.
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 · scoped6.5.24.02025.12.0
Update Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.24 or later to apply the security patch. Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding on form fields, and consider Content Security Policy headers to mitigate XSS risks.
AEM 6.5.24.0 (on-premise) or 2025.12.0 (AEM as a Cloud Service)
- 1. Identify the current Adobe Experience Manager version in use
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on your deployment model (on-premise or cloud)
- 3. For on-premise AEM 6.5 deployments: Upgrade to AEM 6.5.24.0 or later
- 4. For AEM as a Cloud Service: Upgrade to 2025.12.0 or later release
- 5. After upgrade, verify the XSS vulnerability is resolved by testing the affected form fields
- 6. Test that legitimate form submissions and content rendering work correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64590 — 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-2025-64590 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