Fortinet FortiClientEMS up to 7.2.3 HTTPS Request excessive authentication
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 7.2 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability was found in Fortinet FortiClientEMS up to 7.2.3. It has been rated as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the component HTTPS Request Handler. Performing a manipulation results in excessive authentication. This vulnerability is identified as CVE-2024-23106. The attack can be initiated remotely. There is not any exploit available.
Details
A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Fortinet FortiClientEMS up to 7.2.3. This affects an unknown function of the component HTTPS Request Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a excessive authentication vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-307. The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame, making it more susceptible to brute force attacks. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:
An improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts [CWE-307] in FortiClientEMS version 7.2.0 through 7.2.4 and before 7.0.10 allows an unauthenticated attacker to try a brute force attack against the FortiClientEMS console via crafted HTTP or HTTPS requests.
The advisory is shared at fortiguard.fortinet.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2024-23106 since 01/11/2024. The exploitability is told to be difficult. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1110.001 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
- 6.2.0
- 6.2.1
- 6.2.2
- 6.2.3
- 6.2.4
- 6.2.5
- 6.2.6
- 6.2.7
- 6.2.8
- 6.2.9
- 6.4.0
- 6.4.1
- 6.4.2
- 6.4.3
- 6.4.4
- 6.4.5
- 6.4.6
- 6.4.7
- 6.4.8
- 6.4.9
- 7.0.0
- 7.0.1
- 7.0.2
- 7.0.3
- 7.0.4
- 7.0.5
- 7.0.6
- 7.0.7
- 7.0.8
- 7.0.9
- 7.0.10
- 7.2.0
- 7.2.1
- 7.2.2
- 7.2.3
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.fortinet.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.2
VulDB Base Score: 3.7
VulDB Temp Score: 3.7
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 9.8
NVD Vector: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 8.1
CNA Vector (fortinet): 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Excessive authenticationCWE: CWE-307 / CWE-799 / CWE-400
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
01/11/2024 🔍01/14/2025 🔍
01/14/2025 🔍
07/16/2025 🔍
Sources
Vendor: fortinet.comAdvisory: FG-IR-23-476
Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2024-23106 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2024-23106
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-291501
Entry
Created: 01/14/2025 15:30Updated: 07/16/2025 15:49
Changes: 01/14/2025 15:30 (63), 02/19/2025 04:16 (1), 07/16/2025 15:49 (11)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.