CVE-2025-64601
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 where low-privileged authenticated users can inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form fields. When other users browse pages containing these compromised fields, the injected script executes in their browsers.
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.
-
Verify AEM version against affected rangesCheck the installed AEM version in the product console or crx/packagemanager. Common locations: /system/console/configMgr or the AEM startup logs. Compare the version number to the affected ranges: versions < 6.5.24.0, version 6.5, or < 2025.12.0.Affected if The installed AEM version is 6.5.23 or earlier, equals 6.5, or is below 6.5.24.0 or 2025.12.0.
-
Identify active form componentsReview the AEM content repository (crx/de) under /content or /apps for Form, Adaptive Form, or custom form field components that accept user input. Check if these forms are published and accessible to users.Affected if Forms with input fields are deployed and active in the AEM environment.
-
Verify low-privilege user access to form editingReview user group permissions in AEM Users or Groups console. Check if contributors, authors, or other low-privilege groups have write access to form content or form field configurations.Affected if Low-privileged users (non-admin) have permissions to create or edit form content and field values.
-
Inspect form field data for malicious scriptsQuery the JCR repository or search form content for common XSS payloads such as <script>, javascript:, onerror=, onload=, or other HTML/JS injection patterns in form field values. Use CRXDE Lite search or the Query tool.Affected if Form field data contains unsanitized script tags, event handlers, or JavaScript URIs that could execute in user browsers.
The environment is affected if AEM version is within the vulnerable ranges AND forms with user-editable fields are accessible to low-privilege users without proper input validation.
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
Implement strict input validation and output encoding for all form fields in AEM; apply available vendor patches for AEM 6.5.23 and earlier; consider Content Security Policy headers as an additional defense layer.
6.5.24.0 or later (6.5.x branch)
- Review the Adobe Experience Manager upgrade documentation for your current version
- Plan and schedule the upgrade during a maintenance window
- Back up your current AEM instance including repository, database, and configurations
- Test the upgrade in a staging environment before production deployment
- Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.24.0 or later
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the AEM version in the About Adobe Experience Manager page
- Test that the vulnerable form fields no longer allow script injection
- Deploy the upgraded instance to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64601 — 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-2025-64601 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