CVE-2025-5523VulnerabilityPublished 3 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-5523: enilu web-flash · Cross Site Scripting

Affects enilu web-flashSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 23% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 3 Jun 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
Mavencn.enilu/web-flash`pkg:maven/cn.enilu/web-flash`Other threats	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include implementing strict input validation and sanitization on the 'File' parameter in the file upload functionality to neutralize any embedded scripts. 2. Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to restrict the execution of unauthorized scripts in browsers. 3. Use secure coding practices such as encoding output and validating inputs on both client and server sides. 4. Monitor web application logs for suspicious file upload attempts or unusual user activity that could indicate exploitation attempts. 5. Educate users about phishing and social engineering risks to reduce the likelihood of user interaction exploitation. 6. If possible, isolate or sandbox the file upload component to limit the potential impact of an exploit. 7. Engage with the vendor or development team to obtain or develop patches addressing this vulnerability. 8. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on file upload functionalities to detect similar vulnerabilities. 9. Implement web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules designed to detect and block XSS payloads targeting file upload endpoints.

Description

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in enilu web-flash 1.0. This affects the function fileService.upload of the file src/main/java/cn/enilu/flash/api/controller/FileController/upload of the component File Upload. The manipulation of the argument File leads to cross site scripting. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations using enilu web-flash version 1.0, this vulnerability poses a moderate security risk. Exploitation could lead to the compromise of user sessions, theft of sensitive information, or unauthorized actions performed on behalf of users. This is particularly concerning for organizations handling personal data under GDPR, as XSS attacks can facilitate data breaches. The vulnerability could undermine user trust and lead to reputational damage, regulatory fines, and operational disruptions. Since the exploit requires user interaction, phishing or social engineering campaigns could be used to trigger the attack. Organizations relying on web-flash for file uploads in customer-facing or internal applications may face targeted attacks aiming to exploit this vulnerability. The moderate CVSS score reflects that while the vulnerability is not critical, it is sufficiently severe to warrant prompt attention, especially in sectors with high compliance requirements such as finance, healthcare, and government services across Europe.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…