CVE-2025-65267
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 · uneditedIn ERPNext v15.83.2 and Frappe Framework v15.86.0, improper validation of uploaded SVG avatar images allows attackers to embed malicious JavaScript. The payload executes when an administrator clicks the image link to view the avatar, resulting in stored cross-site scripting (XSS). Successful exploitation may lead to account takeover, privilege escalation, or full compromise of the affected ERPNext instance.
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 confidenceERPNext v15.83.2 and Frappe Framework v15.86.0 fail to properly validate SVG avatar image uploads, allowing attackers to embed malicious JavaScript within SVG files. This stored XSS payload executes when an administrator views the avatar image, potentially leading to account takeover or full system compromise.
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= 15.83.2= 15.86.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 installed ERPNext versionAccess the system via bench CLI: bench version or check via the Help > About menu in the web interface. Compare the version number to 15.83.2.Affected if The installed version is exactly 15.83.2
-
Check installed Frappe Framework versionRun bench version or check the Frappe version in the system About page. Compare to 15.86.0.Affected if The installed version is exactly 15.86.0
-
Verify avatar upload functionality existsNavigate to User settings or Profile settings in the ERPNext interface. Look for an avatar or profile picture upload option.Affected if The avatar upload feature is present and accessible to users
-
Inspect for uploaded SVG files in the systemSearch the files directory (typically /private/files/ or the equivalent data directory) for .svg files, particularly those in user profile or avatar-related subdirectories.Affected if SVG files exist in avatar or user profile upload directories
-
Check for untrusted SVG content in file storageOpen any SVG files found in avatar directories with a text editor and inspect for suspicious elements such as <script> tags, event handlers (onload, onclick, etc.), or external resource references (href to external URLs).Affected if Any SVG files contain script elements, event handlers, or external references
You are affected if your ERPNext is version 15.83.2 or Frappe Framework is version 15.86.0 AND the avatar upload feature accepts SVG files 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.
From vendor dataImplement strict validation of SVG uploads by sanitizing or rejecting SVG files containing script elements, event handlers, or external resource references. Consider converting uploaded SVGs to raster formats or deploying Content Security Policy headers to mitigate script execution.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-65267 — 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-2025-65267 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