CVE-2026-53608
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 · uneditedApostropheCMS is an open-source Node.js content management system. Versions up to and including 1.4.2 of the `@apostrophecms/seo` package injects the Google Analytics Tracking ID (`seoGoogleTrackingId`) and Google Tag Manager ID (`seoGoogleTagManager`) directly into `<script>` tag bodies using JavaScript template literals without any sanitization or validation. Any user with editor-level access (the default role for content managers) can set these fields to a malicious value, resulting in stored XSS that executes on every page for every visitor of the site. As of time of publication, no known patched versions are available.
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 confidenceThe @apostrophecms/seo package versions up to 1.4.2 directly injects the seoGoogleTrackingId and seoGoogleTagManager configuration values into <script> tag bodies using JavaScript template literals without any sanitization or validation, allowing stored XSS that executes on every page for all visitors.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/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 @apostrophecms/seo package versionRun `npm list @apostrophecms/seo` or inspect node_modules/@apostrophecms/seo/package.json to find the installed versionAffected if The installed version is 1.4.2 or lower
-
Verify SEO module is enabledInspect your main Apostrophe configuration file (app.js, apostrophe.js, or similar) for the seo module in the modules configurationAffected if The seo module is present and enabled in the configuration
-
Check for seoGoogleTrackingId configurationSearch your Apostrophe configuration for seoGoogleTrackingId settings, typically under modules: { seo: { seoGoogleTrackingId: ... } }Affected if seoGoogleTrackingId is configured with any value (the value itself gets injected unsanitized)
-
Check for seoGoogleTagManager configurationSearch your Apostrophe configuration for seoGoogleTagManager settings, typically under modules: { seo: { seoGoogleTagManager: ... } }Affected if seoGoogleTagManager is configured with any value (the value itself gets injected unsanitized)
You are affected if the @apostrophecms/seo package is installed at version 1.4.2 or lower AND the seo module is enabled with either seoGoogleTrackingId or seoGoogleTagManager configured.
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 dataSince no patched version is available, restrict editor access to SEO configuration fields, implement server-side input validation/sanitization before embedding in templates, or temporarily disable the SEO module until a fix is released.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,568.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-53608 — 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-2026-53608 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