VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jan 2025Updated 13 Jan 2025

CVE-2025-23110: Vanderbilt REDCap · XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting'

Affects Vanderbilt REDCapSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.1Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Jan 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubping-oui-no/REDCap`pkg:github/ping-oui-no/REDCap`Other threats	Affected =14.9.6	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-23110, organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Upgrade REDCap to a version where this vulnerability is patched once available from Vanderbilt. 2) Until a patch is released, restrict CSV file uploads to trusted users only and implement strict validation and sanitization of CSV content, especially the email-subject field, to remove or neutralize potentially malicious scripts. 3) Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to limit the execution of inline scripts and reduce the impact of XSS payloads. 4) Educate users about the risks of uploading untrusted CSV files and clicking suspicious links or fields within REDCap interfaces. 5) Monitor application logs for unusual upload activities or error messages related to CSV processing. 6) Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAF) with custom rules to detect and block XSS payloads in file uploads. 7) Conduct regular security assessments and code reviews focusing on input validation and output encoding in REDCap customizations. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific vector and context of this vulnerability.

Description

An issue was discovered in REDCap 14.9.6. A Reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the email-subject field exists while performing an upload of a CSV file containing a list of alert configurations. An attacker can send the victim a CSV file containing the XSS payload in the email-subject. Once the victim uploads the file, he automatically lands on a page to view the uploaded data. If the victim clicks on the email-subject value, it triggers the XSS payload.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is on confidentiality and integrity within affected REDCap instances. Successful exploitation can allow attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of the victim’s browser session, potentially leading to theft of session cookies, credentials, or other sensitive information accessible via the browser. Attackers may also perform unauthorized actions on behalf of the victim, such as modifying data or triggering unintended workflows. Although availability is not directly impacted, the compromise of user sessions can disrupt research activities and data integrity. Given REDCap’s widespread use in academic, clinical, and research institutions globally, exploitation could lead to exposure of sensitive research data or personally identifiable information (PII). The requirement for user interaction (clicking the malicious email-subject) reduces the likelihood of automated mass exploitation but does not eliminate targeted attacks. Organizations relying on REDCap 14.9.6 should consider this vulnerability a significant risk to data confidentiality and user trust.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/ping-oui-no/Vulnerability-Research-CVESS/blob/main/RedCap/CVE_VVVVVV/README.md (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 12:35 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats