CVE-2026-23625
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 · uneditedOpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Versions 16.3.0 through 16.6.4 are affected by a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in the Roadmap view. OpenProject’s roadmap view renders the “Related work packages” list for each version. When a version contains work packages from a different project (e.g., a subproject), the helper link_to_work_package prepends package.project.to_s to the link and returns the entire string with .html_safe. Because project names are user-controlled and no escaping happens before calling html_safe, any HTML placed in a subproject name is injected verbatim into the page. The underlying issue is mitigated in versions 16.6.5 and 17.0.0 by setting a `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` header, which was in place until a refactoring move to Rails standard content-security policy, which did not properly apply this header in the new configuration since OpenProject 16.3.0. Those who cannot upgrade their installations should ensure that they add a X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff header in their proxying web application server.
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 confidenceOpenProject versions 16.3.0-16.6.4 contain a stored XSS in the Roadmap view where user-controlled subproject names are rendered without escaping via .html_safe, allowing injection of malicious HTML/JavaScript.
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> 16.3.0, < 16.6.5CVSS 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.
-
Determine OpenProject versionRun 'openproject --version' or check the admin UI under Administration > Information, or inspect the Gemfile.lock for the openproject gem versionAffected if Version is greater than 16.3.0 and less than 16.6.5
-
Verify Roadmap module is accessibleNavigate to a project and check if the Roadmap module is enabled under Project > Settings > ModulesAffected if Roadmap module is enabled for any project
-
Confirm subprojects feature is in useCheck if any projects have subprojects created under Project > Settings > Information > Subprojects, or create a test subproject to verify the feature worksAffected if Subprojects exist or can be created in the environment
-
Inspect subproject name rendering in Roadmap viewCreate a subproject with a name containing HTML/JavaScript (e.g., '<script>alert(1)</script>'), then navigate to the parent project's Roadmap view and examine the page source to see if the script executes or appears unescapedAffected if The subproject name is rendered without HTML encoding in the Roadmap view
User is affected if OpenProject version is between 16.3.0 and 16.6.5 inclusive and the Roadmap module with subprojects is in use, allowing unescaped subproject names to be stored and rendered.
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 · scoped16.6.5
Upgrade to 16.6.5/17.0.0 or add X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff header at the proxy/web server level.
16.6.5 or 17.0.0
- 1. Back up your OpenProject database and configuration files before upgrading.
- 2. Follow the official OpenProject upgrade documentation for your installation method (package or Docker).
- 3. Upgrade to version 16.6.5 or 17.0.0, which contain the fix for this vulnerability.
- 4. After upgrade, verify the Roadmap view renders correctly and that the X-Content-Type-Options header is present in responses.
- 5. As an alternative mitigation if upgrading is not immediately possible, configure your reverse proxy (nginx, Apache, or other) to add the header `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` to all HTTP responses.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-23625 — 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-2026-23625 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