CVE-2025-54248VulnerabilityPublished 9 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-54248: Adobe Experience Manager · Improper Input Validation

Affects Adobe Experience ManagerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 6.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 93% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
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: 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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 9 Sep 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 2026-10-25.

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 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
Adobe Adobe Experience Manager	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigation steps: 1) Immediately inventory all Adobe Experience Manager instances and verify their versions. Prioritize upgrading to the latest version once Adobe releases a patch addressing CVE-2025-54248. 2) Until patches are available, restrict network access to AEM administrative interfaces and content repositories to trusted IP ranges and VPNs only. 3) Implement strict access controls and monitor for unusual read access patterns or privilege escalations within AEM logs. 4) Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious input patterns that could exploit input validation flaws. 5) Conduct internal penetration testing focused on input validation and access control bypass scenarios in AEM environments. 6) Educate administrators and security teams about this vulnerability and ensure rapid incident response capabilities are in place. 7) Review integration points and APIs exposed by AEM for potential indirect exploitation paths. 8) Maintain up-to-date backups of AEM content and configurations to enable recovery if compromise occurs.

Description

Adobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.23.0 and earlier are affected by an Improper Input Validation vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. A low-privileged attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized read access. Scope is changed

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could have serious consequences. Many enterprises, government agencies, and public sector organizations in Europe use Adobe Experience Manager to manage critical web content and digital assets. Unauthorized read access could lead to exposure of sensitive personal data protected under GDPR, intellectual property, or confidential business information. This could result in regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and loss of customer trust. Additionally, the ability to bypass security features with low privileges increases the risk of insider threats or exploitation by attackers who have gained limited access. The changed scope suggests that the breach could extend beyond isolated components, potentially affecting multiple systems or services integrated with AEM. This amplifies the risk of lateral movement within networks and broader data exposure. The lack of known exploits currently reduces immediate risk, but the high CVSS score and ease of exploitation mean organizations should act proactively to prevent potential attacks.

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

helpx.adobe.com/security/products/experience-manager/apsb25-90.html (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Sep 2025, 16:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-20

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats