CVE-2025-61674VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jan 2026Updated 12 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-61674: octobercms october · Cross-site Scripting

Affects octobercms octoberSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium : upgrade to 4.0.12 or 3.7.13 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.1Medium

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.0.12, 3.7.13

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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 10 Jan 2026
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

Upgrade october to 4.0.12 or 3.7.13; octobercms/october to 3.7.13.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
octobercmsoctober	Affected >=4.0.0 <4.0.12 <3.7.13	Fixed in 4.0.12 3.7.13
GitHuboctobercms/october`pkg:github/octobercms/october`Other threats	Affected <3.7.13	Fixed in 3.7.13

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

AI-suggested

European organizations using October CMS should immediately verify their version and upgrade to 3.7.13 or 4.0.12 or later where the vulnerability is patched. Beyond patching, organizations should audit user permissions to ensure only trusted personnel have Global Editor Settings access, minimizing the risk of insider exploitation. Implement strict input validation and content security policies (CSP) on backend interfaces to reduce the impact of potential XSS attacks. Regularly monitor backend logs for unusual activity or script injections. Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) for backend access to reduce the risk of compromised credentials being used to exploit this vulnerability. Conduct security awareness training for administrators and editors to recognize suspicious behavior or phishing attempts that could lead to credential compromise. Finally, consider isolating backend CMS management interfaces from public networks or restricting access via VPN or IP whitelisting to reduce exposure.

Description

October is a Content Management System (CMS) and web platform. Prior to versions 3.7.13 and 4.0.12, a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability was identified in October CMS backend configuration forms. A user with the Global Editor Settings permission could inject malicious HTML/JS into the stylesheet input at Markup Styles. A specially crafted input could break out of the intended <style> context, allowing arbitrary script execution across backend pages for all users. This issue has been patched in versions 3.7.13 and 4.0.12.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality and integrity of backend CMS operations. Attackers exploiting this flaw could execute arbitrary scripts in the context of backend users, potentially leading to session hijacking, unauthorized content changes, or further lateral movement within the organization’s infrastructure. This could result in data leakage, defacement, or manipulation of sensitive content managed via October CMS. Given that October CMS is used by various enterprises and public sector entities across Europe for website management, the risk extends to both private and governmental sectors. The requirement for authenticated access with elevated permissions limits exposure but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments with multiple editors or administrators. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate threat but does not preclude targeted attacks or insider threats. Organizations failing to patch may face reputational damage, compliance issues (e.g., GDPR if personal data is compromised), and operational disruptions due to compromised CMS backends.

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

github.com/octobercms/october/security/advisories/GHSA-gxxc-m74c-f48x (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Jan 2026, 07:52 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats