CVE-2025-64596
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 when other users view the affected 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< 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 System Information console at /system/console/status-productinfo or check the version from the AEM Start page footer. You can also check the JAR file name in the crx-quickstart folder.Affected if The version shown is 6.5.23 or earlier, or falls below 6.5.24.0, or is below 2025.12.0, or is exactly version 6.5.
-
Confirm AEM deployment typeDetermine if the instance is using the 6.5 release line or the newer release cadence (2025.x). Check the product version string returned from the system information console.Affected if The deployment uses AEM 6.5.x with version 6.5.23 or earlier, or uses the 2025.x release line with version below 2025.12.0.
-
Identify custom form field componentsReview the application codebase and look for custom form input components or custom templates that render form fields. Check the /apps folder in CRX/DE for custom form-related nodes under /apps/your-project/components.Affected if Custom form components or form-based AEM components are present in the system, as these could contain the vulnerable form fields.
-
Assess low-privileged user accessCheck user group permissions in AEM via the User Administration console at /useradmin. Look for groups with limited permissions that have access to create or edit form content, such as the 'content-authors' group.Affected if Low-privileged users (non-admin) have write access to form editing capabilities or content pages containing forms.
You are affected if your AEM version is 6.5.23 or earlier, below 6.5.24.0, below 2025.12.0, or exactly 6.5, AND your system allows low-privileged users to edit form fields that other users will view.
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
Upgrade to AEM 6.5.24 or later, which contains the security fix. Until then, implement output encoding and input validation on affected form fields, and consider restricting low-privileged user permissions to form editing.
AEM 6.5.24.0 or later (or AEM as a Cloud Service 2025.12.0+)
- Backup your Adobe Experience Manager instance and database before upgrading
- Review Adobe's upgrade documentation for AEM 6.5.24.0 to understand any migration requirements
- Test the upgrade in a non-production environment to ensure compatibility with custom code and integrations
- Upgrade AEM from version 6.5.23 or earlier to version 6.5.24.0 (or later 6.5.x release)
- If using AEM as a Cloud Service, upgrade to 2025.12.0 or later
- After upgrade, verify the XSS vulnerability is remediated by testing the affected form fields
- Deploy the tested upgrade to production
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-2025-64596 — 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-2025-64596 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