Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-41745

XSS in Phoenixcontact Fl Nat 2008 Firmware ≤ 3.50

Published
09 December 2025
Modified
19 December 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0058 44th percentile
Risk Priority 55 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-41745 is a high-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Phoenixcontact Fl Switch 2303-8Sp1. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 44th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

An XSS vulnerability in pxc_portCntr2.php can be used by an unauthenticated remote attacker to trick an authenticated user to send a manipulated POST request to the device in order to change parameters available via web based management (WBM). The vulnerability…

more

does not provide access to system-level resources such as operating system internals or privileged functions. Access is limited to device configuration parameters that are available in the context of the web application. The session cookie is secured by the httpOnly Flag. Therefore an attacker is not able to take over the session of an authenticated user.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-3526Same vendor: Phoenixcontact
CVE-2023-22972Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-4482Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-48472Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-4175Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-50833Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-30097Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-36656Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-2477Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-46783Shared CWE-79

Affected Assets

phoenixcontact
fl nat 2008 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl nat 2208 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl nat 2304-2gc-2sfp firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2005 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2008 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2008f firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2016 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2105 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2108 firmware
≤ 3.50
phoenixcontact
fl switch 2116 firmware
≤ 3.50
+59 more product configuration(s) — see NVD for full list

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
  • SI-15 Information Output Filtering
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.3.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires validation and sanitization of all web input to block the malicious script in pxc_portCntr2.php that enables the XSS vector.

prevent

Requires output filtering/encoding on responses from the WBM so that attacker-supplied content cannot execute in the authenticated user's browser context.

prevent

Enforces that configuration-changing POST requests must satisfy explicit authorization rules rather than relying solely on the presence of an authenticated session cookie.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

detects

Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.

prevents

Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.

prevents

Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.

prevents

Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.

none

Webpage malware scanning and block-listing of known malicious sites reduce the likelihood that reflected or stored script payloads reach a user’s browser.

References