CVE-2025-64840
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 confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23 and earlier allows low-privileged attackers to inject malicious JavaScript into form fields. When victims browse to pages containing these compromised fields, the script executes in their browsers, enabling session hijacking or data theft.
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 AEM versionAccess the AEM Welcome page or check the product version through the system console (help -> About Adobe Experience Manager). Compare the displayed version number to the affected ranges: versions below 6.5.24.0, version 6.5, or versions below 2025.12.0.Affected if The installed version falls within < 6.5.24.0, = 6.5, or < 2025.12.0.
-
Locate custom form componentsReview the AEM repository for custom form components or adaptive form definitions under /apps or /content that accept user input. Identify all form fields that store and render user-submitted data back to the page.Affected if Custom form components exist that accept and display user input without known sanitization.
-
Test form field output encodingSubmit a benign test payload containing HTML/JavaScript characters (such as <script>alert(1)</script> or <img src=x onerror=alert(1)>) into form fields. Then navigate to a page that renders the stored value and observe whether the payload executes or renders as raw HTML.Affected if The submitted script tags or event handlers execute in the browser rather than being escaped or encoded.
-
Review Content Security PolicyCheck the HTTP response headers on published AEM pages for the presence and configuration of Content Security Policy (CSP) headers, specifically looking for 'script-src' directives that might restrict inline script execution.Affected if CSP headers are missing, or allow 'unsafe-inline' in script-src, offering no defense against XSS execution.
A user is affected if their AEM version is 6.5.23 or earlier (or < 6.5.24.0 / < 2025.12.0) AND they have custom form fields that render user input without output encoding and lack CSP protections.
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
Apply AEM security patches to upgrade beyond version 6.5.23, implement input validation and output encoding on all form fields, and consider Content Security Policy headers to mitigate XSS execution.
AEM 6.5.24.0 or later (6.x line); AEM cloud service 2025.12.0 or later
- Verify current Adobe Experience Manager version by checking the product about page or system console
- Confirm the exact version (must be < 6.5.24.0 for 6.x line or < 2025.12.0 for cloud service to be vulnerable)
- Download Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.24.0 or later from the Adobe distribution center (software.adobe.com)
- Review Adobe's upgrade documentation for AEM 6.5.24.0
- Plan upgrade in non-production environment first
- Execute upgrade following Adobe's standard upgrade procedure
- Verify the upgrade completed successfully
- Confirm the fixed version is now running
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64840 — 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-2025-64840 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