fkie_cve-2025-23362
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd
Published
2025-01-29 02:15
Modified
2025-01-29 02:15
Severity ?
6.1 (Medium) - CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Summary
The old versions of EXIF Viewer Classic contain a cross-site scripting vulnerability caused by improper handling of EXIF meta data. When an image is rendered and crafted EXIF meta data is processed, an arbitrary script may be executed on the web browser. Versions 2.3.2 and 2.4.0 were reported as vulnerable. According to the vendor, the product has been refactored after those old versions and the version 3.0.1 is not vulnerable.
References
vultures@jpcert.or.jphttps://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/exif-viewer-classic/nafpfdcmppffipmhcpkbplhkoiekndck
vultures@jpcert.or.jphttps://exifviewers.com/
vultures@jpcert.or.jphttps://jvn.jp/en/jp/JVN05508012/
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version


To clipboard 

{
   cveTags: [],
   descriptions: [
      {
         lang: "en",
         value: "The old versions of EXIF Viewer Classic contain a cross-site scripting vulnerability caused by improper handling of EXIF meta data. When an image is rendered and crafted EXIF meta data is processed, an arbitrary script may be executed on the web browser. Versions 2.3.2 and 2.4.0 were reported as vulnerable. According to the vendor, the product has been refactored after those old versions and the version 3.0.1 is not vulnerable.",
      },
      {
         lang: "es",
         value: "Las versiones antiguas de EXIF ??Viewer Classic contienen una vulnerabilidad de cross-site scripting causada por la gestión inadecuada de los metadatos EXIF. Cuando se renderiza una imagen y se procesan los metadatos EXIF ??manipulado, se puede ejecutar una script arbitraria en el navegador web. Se informó que las versiones 2.3.2 y 2.4.0 eran vulnerables. Según el proveedor, el producto se ha refactorizado después de esas versiones antiguas y la versión 3.0.1 no es vulnerable.",
      },
   ],
   id: "CVE-2025-23362",
   lastModified: "2025-01-29T02:15:27.910",
   metrics: {
      cvssMetricV30: [
         {
            cvssData: {
               attackComplexity: "LOW",
               attackVector: "NETWORK",
               availabilityImpact: "NONE",
               baseScore: 6.1,
               baseSeverity: "MEDIUM",
               confidentialityImpact: "LOW",
               integrityImpact: "LOW",
               privilegesRequired: "NONE",
               scope: "CHANGED",
               userInteraction: "REQUIRED",
               vectorString: "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N",
               version: "3.0",
            },
            exploitabilityScore: 2.8,
            impactScore: 2.7,
            source: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
            type: "Secondary",
         },
      ],
   },
   published: "2025-01-29T02:15:27.910",
   references: [
      {
         source: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
         url: "https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/exif-viewer-classic/nafpfdcmppffipmhcpkbplhkoiekndck",
      },
      {
         source: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
         url: "https://exifviewers.com/",
      },
      {
         source: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
         url: "https://jvn.jp/en/jp/JVN05508012/",
      },
   ],
   sourceIdentifier: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
   vulnStatus: "Awaiting Analysis",
   weaknesses: [
      {
         description: [
            {
               lang: "en",
               value: "CWE-79",
            },
         ],
         source: "vultures@jpcert.or.jp",
         type: "Primary",
      },
   ],
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.

Security Advisory comment format.

This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.

UUIDv4 of the comment
UUIDv4 of the Vulnerability-Lookup instance
When the comment was created originally
When the comment was last updated
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
The identifier of the vulnerability (CVE ID, GHSA-ID, PYSEC ID, etc.).



Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.