Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-39425 is a medium-severity Basic XSS (CWE-80) vulnerability in Maxkb Maxkb. Its CVSS base score is 5.1 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 8th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Enterprise AI Assistants; in the Privacy and Disclosure risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) 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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-22192
Vulnerability Data
MaxKB is an open-source AI assistant for enterprise. Versions 2.7.1 and below contain a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that allows authenticated users to inject arbitrary HTML and JavaScript into the Application prologue (Opening Remarks) field by wrapping malicious payloads…
more
in <html_rander> tags. The backend fails to sanitize or encode HTML entities in the prologue field when applications are created or updated via the /admin/api/workspace/{workspace_id}/application endpoint, storing the raw payload directly in the database. The frontend then renders this content using an innerHTML-equivalent mechanism, trusting <html_rander>-wrapped content to be safe, which enables persistent DOM-based Stored XSS execution against any visitor who opens the affected chatbot interface. Exploitation can lead to session hijacking, unauthorized actions performed on behalf of victims (such as deleting workspaces or applications), and sensitive data exposure. This issue has been fixed in version 2.8.0.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- Enterprise AI Assistants
- Risk Domain
- Privacy and Disclosure
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ai
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.3.1V1.3.3V1.3.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect neutralization of script tags through targeted XSS test cases.
Input validation explicitly requires checking and neutralizing untrusted web inputs containing script-related characters before they reach a downstream renderer.
Secure engineering principles include mandatory output encoding and neutralization of HTML metacharacters to stop injection at the source.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require output encoding and input validation that prevent basic XSS.
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.
Security testing in development catches unneutralized script tags before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent basic XSS.
Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralization of script-related HTML tags.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping of <, >, & to block XSS.
Web filtering can block some reflected XSS payloads at the network edge.