VulnerabilityPublished 29 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-57424: MyCourts · Cross-site Scripting

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.3 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.3High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 29 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 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability effectively, organizations should: 1) Implement strict input validation and output encoding on the LTA number profile field to prevent injection of malicious scripts. 2) Apply the HttpOnly flag to all session cookies to prevent client-side scripts from accessing session tokens. 3) Conduct a thorough security review and penetration testing of the MyCourts v3 application focusing on XSS and session management weaknesses. 4) Monitor application logs and user activity for signs of anomalous behavior indicative of session hijacking or XSS exploitation. 5) Educate users and administrators about the risks of XSS and encourage cautious behavior when viewing user-generated content. 6) Engage with the software vendor or development team to obtain patches or updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available. 7) Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules tailored to detect and block XSS payloads targeting the affected fields. These measures, combined, will reduce the likelihood of successful exploitation and limit potential damage.

Description

A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the MyCourts v3 application within the LTA number profile field. An attacker can insert arbitrary JavaScript into their profile, which executes in the browser of any user viewing it, including administrators. Due to the absence of the HttpOnly flag on the session cookie, this flaw could be exploited to capture session tokens and hijack user sessions, enabling elevated access.

Impact

For European organizations using MyCourts v3, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to confidentiality, integrity, and availability of user accounts and potentially sensitive data managed within the application. Attackers exploiting this flaw could impersonate legitimate users, including administrators, leading to unauthorized data access, manipulation, or disruption of services. Given that session tokens can be stolen, attackers might maintain persistent access, complicating incident response and remediation efforts. The impact extends beyond individual users to organizational trust and compliance, especially under GDPR regulations, as unauthorized data exposure could result in regulatory penalties. Additionally, organizations relying on MyCourts v3 for court or legal management functions could face operational disruptions, reputational damage, and legal liabilities if the 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).
CWE-1004Sensitive Cookie Without 'HttpOnly' Flag (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A02:2025: Security Misconfiguration (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a cookie to store sensitive information, but the cookie is not marked with the HttpOnly flag.
Implementation
Leverage the HttpOnly flag when setting a sensitive cookie in a response.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Session Management (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

aardwolfsecurity.com/cve-2025-57424-stored-xss-vulnerability-in-mycourts/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Sep 2025, 18:52 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79, CWE-1004

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats