VulnerabilityPublished 3 Jul 2025Updated 10 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-53502: Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki – FeaturedFeeds Extension · Improper Input Validation

Affects Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki – FeaturedFeeds ExtensionSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium · fixed in 1.44.0 : update Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki – FeaturedFeeds Extension when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.44.0, 1.43.0, 1.40.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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 3 Jul 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

Upgrade wikimedia/mediawiki/extensions/FeaturedFeeds to 1.44.0, 1.43.0 or 1.40.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubwikimedia/mediawiki/extensions/FeaturedFeeds`pkg:github/wikimedia/mediawiki/extensions/FeaturedFeeds`Other threats	Affected >=1.39.0 <1.40.0 >=1.42.0 <1.43.0 >=1.43.0 <1.44.0	Fixed in 1.40.0 1.43.0 1.44.0

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-2025-53502, organizations should promptly update the FeaturedFeeds Extension to a patched version once available from the Wikimedia Foundation. If you cannot patch yet, administrators should consider disabling the FeaturedFeeds Extension if it is not critical to operations. Implementing a Web Application Firewall (WAF) with rules to detect and block typical XSS payloads targeting Mediawiki can provide interim protection. Additionally, organizations should enforce Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to restrict the execution of unauthorized scripts in browsers accessing the wiki. Regularly auditing and sanitizing user-generated content and inputs within the wiki environment can reduce risk. Monitoring logs for suspicious activity related to the FeaturedFeeds Extension and educating users about the risks of clicking on untrusted links within the wiki can further enhance security. Finally, organizations should maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any exploitation attempts.

Description

Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki - FeaturedFeeds Extension allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS).This issue affects Mediawiki - FeaturedFeeds Extension: 1.39.X, 1.42.X, 1.43.X.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be substantial, particularly for government agencies, educational institutions, and enterprises that rely on Mediawiki for collaborative documentation and knowledge sharing. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, session hijacking, and potential defacement or manipulation of wiki content. This could undermine trust in the affected platforms, disrupt internal workflows, and expose organizations to regulatory compliance risks under GDPR due to potential data breaches. Public-facing wikis used for disseminating official information could be manipulated to spread misinformation or malicious content, impacting organizational reputation and public trust. The lack of required authentication for exploitation increases the threat surface, making it easier for external attackers to target these systems. Additionally, the vulnerability could be chained with other attacks to escalate privileges or move laterally within networks, further amplifying its impact.

CWE-20Improper Input Validation (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #18OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of…
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: 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…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Jul 2025, 20:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-20

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats