CVE-2025-64792
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. A low-privileged attacker can inject malicious JavaScript into vulnerable form fields, which then executes in victim browsers when they view pages containing those compromised fields.
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.
-
Check AEM product versionAccess the AEM Welcome page at /aem/start.html or query the version via the System Console at /system/console/product. Look for the exact version number displayed (such as 6.5.23, 6.5.22, or 6.5).Affected if Version is listed as 6.5.23 or any earlier 6.5.x release, or the version is shown as 6.5 without a specific patch number indicating 6.5.24 or later, or the version begins with a date before 2025.12.0.
-
Verify Forms or Adaptive Forms feature is in useCheck if AEM Forms addon is installed by navigating to /aem/forms.html or by reviewing the installed packages in the Package Manager at /crx/packmgr. Look for packages containing 'forms' in the name.Affected if AEM Forms or Adaptive Forms functionality is installed and active on the instance.
-
Inspect form field content for suspicious script tagsAccess the AEM Content Explorer or CRX/DE at /crx/de and navigate to content nodes where form data is stored (commonly under /content or /etc/forms). Search for stored form submissions containing script tags or JavaScript event handlers.Affected if Form field nodes contain unsanitized HTML or script tags that could execute in a victim browser.
-
Review recently created or modified form contentUse the AEM Query Builder or query the repository for recently modified nodes under form-related paths. Look for unexpected content in form field values.Affected if Recent form submissions or form field content contains unusual script-related strings that were not intentionally authored.
A user is affected if their installed AEM version is any release before 6.5.24.0 or before 2025.12.0 AND the instance has Forms functionality in use where untrusted input could be stored in form fields.
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 Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.24 or later to obtain the security patch. Additionally, implement input validation and output encoding on form fields as a defense-in-depth measure.
6.5.24.0 or 2025.12.0
- Identify the current Adobe Experience Manager version by checking the AEM about page or system console
- Create a complete backup of the AEM instance including the repository, database, and configuration files
- Upgrade Adobe Experience Manager to version 6.5.24.0 or later (or to the 2025.12.0 release) following Adobe's official upgrade documentation
- After upgrade, verify the new version is running correctly (check about page shows 6.5.24.0 or later)
- Validate that the stored XSS vulnerability is remediated by testing that malicious scripts in form fields are properly escaped and not executable
- Ensure all custom code and third-party integrations function properly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64792 — 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-2025-64792 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