Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-48494

XSS in Forceu Gokapi ≤ 2.0.0

Published
02 June 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 4.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0014 4th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-48494 is a medium-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Forceu Gokapi. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Drive-by Compromise (T1189); ranked at the 4th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Gokapi is a self-hosted file sharing server with automatic expiration and encryption support. When using end-to-end encryption, a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability can be exploited by uploading a file with JavaScript code embedded in the filename. After upload and every…

more

time someone opens the upload list, the script is then parsed. Prior to version 2.0.0, there was no user permission system implemented, therefore all authenticated users were already able to see and modify all resources, even if end-to-end encrypted, as the encryption key had to be the same for all users using a version prior to 2.0.0. If a user is the only authenticated user using Gokapi, they are not affected. This issue has been fixed in v2.0.0. A possible workaround would be to disable end-to-end encryption.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1189 Drive-by Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1059.007 JavaScript Execution
Adversaries may abuse various implementations of JavaScript for execution.
Why these techniques?

Stored XSS via malicious filename in Gokapi web app enables drive-by compromise (T1189) and exploitation of public-facing application (T1190), facilitating JavaScript execution (T1059.007) in victims' browsers when viewing upload lists.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-6649Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6465Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6945Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6462Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6313Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-5599Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-5538Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-6472Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-5892Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-50566Shared CWE-79

Affected Assets

forceu
gokapi
2.0.0 · ≤ 2.0.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
  • AC-6 Least Privilege
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 blocks the stored XSS by validating and sanitizing untrusted filename input before storage and display.

prevent

Enforces per-user access restrictions on resources and the upload list, eliminating the pre-2.0.0 absence of any permission system that let every authenticated user trigger or view the payload.

prevent

Limits the scope of damage by ensuring authenticated users receive only the minimum privileges needed, reducing the blast radius of both the missing permission model and the XSS trigger.

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.

prevents

Secure coding standards require proper neutralization of alternate script syntax, directly eliminating CWE-87.

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

Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralization of untrusted input to block XSS variants.

References