Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-48495

XSS in Forceu Gokapi ≤ 2.0.0

XSS
Published
02 June 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
View 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 0.0012 2th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-48495 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 JavaScript (T1059.007); ranked at the 2th 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-6 (Least Privilege) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Gokapi is a self-hosted file sharing server with automatic expiration and encryption support. By renaming the friendly name of an API key, an authenticated user could inject JS into the API key overview, which would also be executed when another…

more

user clicks on his API tab. 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 of versions 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 workaround would be to not open the API page if it is possible that another user might have injected code.

CWE(s)
CWE-79CWE-87

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1059.007 JavaScript Execution
Adversaries may abuse various implementations of JavaScript for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
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.
attack.mitre.org →
Why these techniques?

The stored XSS vulnerability enables authenticated attackers to inject malicious JavaScript into the API key overview, which executes in other users' browsers upon viewing the page (T1059.007). This exploits a public-facing web application (T1190).

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-2023-50566Shared CWE-79
CVE-2023-4979Shared 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-6 Least Privilege
  • SI-15 Information Output Filtering
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

SI-10 Information Input Validation good match
prevent

Validates and sanitizes the API-key friendly-name input field to block JavaScript injection before storage and later execution.

AC-6 Least Privilege good match
prevent

Enforces least-privilege permissions so an authenticated user cannot modify shared API-key metadata that other users will view.

SI-15 Information Output Filtering partial match
prevent

Filters or encodes the API-key overview output before rendering, neutralizing any stored script that evaded input validation.

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.

A.8.28 Secure coding mostly match
prevents

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

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
detects

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

A.5.6 Contact with special interest groups partial match
prevents

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

A.5.7 Threat intelligence partial match
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.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
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.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

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

References