CVE-2026-48355
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 is 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. Scope is changed.
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 · moderate confidenceStored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Adobe Experience Manager where low-privileged attackers can inject malicious JavaScript into form fields. When victims browse pages containing these compromised fields, the injected scripts execute 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<= 6.5.25.0<= 2020.5.0= 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 your AEM versionNavigate to Help > About Adobe Experience Manager or access /system/console/bundles to view the installed AEM version. Compare against the affected versions: <= 6.5.25.0, <= 2020.5.0, or version 6.5.Affected if Your installed AEM version falls within the affected ranges listed above.
-
Identify accessible form fields in your AEM instanceReview the content structure under /content or /apps directories for form components (look for foundation/components/form, coralui components, or custom form implementations). Use CRX/DE to navigate the repository and identify form field configurations.Affected if Low-privileged users (such as those with contributor or author-level permissions) have access to create or edit form fields in your AEM pages.
-
Query stored form data for potential XSS payloadsUse the AEM Query Builder or CRXDE Lite to search for script tags or JavaScript event handlers in form field content nodes. Search under /content for patterns like <script, javascript:, onload=, onerror=, onmouseover=.Affected if Form fields in your repository contain unsanitized script tags or event handler attributes that could execute in victim browsers.
-
Verify Content Security Policy headersInspect HTTP responses from your AEM instance using browser developer tools or a command-line tool (curl -I) to check for CSP headers. Look for 'Content-Security-Policy' in the response headers.Affected if No CSP headers are configured, or the existing CSP policy allows inline scripts ('unsafe-inline') and does not restrict script sources.
-
Review form field input validation configurationExamine the form component configuration in AEM to verify if server-side validation rules are applied. Check the model or servlet that processes form submissions for input sanitization or validation logic.Affected if Form fields lack server-side input validation or allow raw HTML/JavaScript in submitted values without encoding.
Your environment is affected if you run an AEM version within the affected ranges AND have form fields accessible to low-privileged users WITHOUT proper input validation and CSP protections in place.
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 · scopedImplement strict input validation and output encoding for all form fields in AEM. ApplyContent Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS execution. Apply vendor patches when available.
AEM 6.5.26.0 or later (for 6.5.x releases); 2020.6.0 or later (for AEM as a Cloud Service)
- 1. Identify your current Adobe Experience Manager version by checking the product about page or system console.
- 2. If running AEM 6.5.x version <= 6.5.25.0, upgrade to AEM 6.5.26.0 or later.
- 3. If running AEM as a Cloud Service (2020.x release train), ensure you are on version 2020.6.0 or later.
- 4. After upgrade, clear the AEM dispatcher cache and republish any affected content.
- 5. Validate that the fix is applied by testing the vulnerable form fields with a benign script payload (e.g., <script>alert(1)</script>) to confirm XSS is no longer executable.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,720.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-48355 — 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-2026-48355 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