VulnerabilityPublished 29 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-53541: Enalean tuleap · Cross-site Scripting

Affects Enalean tuleapSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium : upgrade to 16.9-3 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 16.9-3

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

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

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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 29 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 enalean/tuleap to 16.9-3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubenalean/tuleap`pkg:github/enalean/tuleap`Other threats	Affected <16.9-3	Fixed in 16.9-3

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade to the fixed versions of Tuleap Community Edition (16.9.99.1751892857 or later) or Enterprise Edition (16.8-5 or 16.9-3 or later) as soon as possible to eliminate the vulnerability.
Implement strict access controls and least privilege principles to limit which users can create or modify artifacts, reducing the risk of malicious input insertion.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules tuned to detect and block XSS payloads targeting Tuleap interfaces.
Conduct regular code reviews and input validation audits for custom Tuleap plugins or integrations to ensure no additional injection vectors exist.
Educate users about the risks of interacting with untrusted artifacts and encourage caution when clicking on links or viewing artifact details, especially from less trusted users.
Monitor logs and user activity for unusual patterns that may indicate attempts to exploit this vulnerability.
If immediate upgrade is not feasible, consider temporary mitigations such as disabling artifact child display features or restricting artifact modification capabilities to trusted users only.

Description

Tuleap is an Open Source Suite created to facilitate management of software development and collaboration. In Tuleap Community Edition prior to version 16.9.99.1751892857 and Tuleap Enterprise Edition prior to 16.8-5 and 16.9-3, malicious users with some control over certain artifacts could insert malicious code when displaying the children of a parent artifact to force victims to execute the uncontrolled code. This is fixed in version Tuleap Community Edition prior to version 16.9.99.1751892857 and Tuleap Enterprise Edition prior to 16.8-5 and 16.9-3.

Impact

For European organizations using Tuleap for software development and collaboration, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized script execution within their project management environments. This can lead to compromised user sessions, unauthorized modification of project artifacts, or disruption of collaboration workflows. Since Tuleap is often used in development and operational environments, exploitation could indirectly affect the integrity of software development lifecycles, potentially introducing risks to downstream software products. The requirement for some level of privilege and user interaction limits the ease of exploitation but does not eliminate the risk, especially in environments with many users and complex artifact management. The impact on availability, while rated medium, could disrupt critical project management activities. Confidentiality is not directly impacted, but integrity and availability concerns could have cascading effects on organizational operations. European organizations with sensitive or critical development projects could face operational delays and increased risk of insider threat exploitation or lateral movement within their networks if this vulnerability is exploited.

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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Jul 2025, 19:47 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats