Fortinet FortiPAM up to 1.6.0 CLI cleartext storage in memory
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 3.5 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability identified as problematic has been detected in Fortinet FortiPAM up to 1.6.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the component CLI. This manipulation causes cleartext storage in memory. This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2025-61713. The attack needs to be launched locally. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Fortinet FortiPAM up to 1.6.0. It has been declared as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is some unknown functionality of the component CLI. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cleartext storage in memory vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-316. The product stores sensitive information in cleartext in memory. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:
A Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information in Memory vulnerability [CWE-316] in Fortinet FortiPAM 1.6.0, FortiPAM 1.5 all versions, FortiPAM 1.4 all versions, FortiPAM 1.3 all versions, FortiPAM 1.2 all versions, FortiPAM 1.1 all versions, FortiPAM 1.0 all versions may allow an authenticated attacker with read-write admin privileges to the CLI to obtain other administrators' credentials via diagnose commands.
The advisory is shared at fortiguard.fortinet.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2025-61713 since 09/30/2025. The exploitation appears to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. The exploitation requires an enhanced level of successful authentication. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1555 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
- 1.0
- 1.0.0
- 1.0.1
- 1.0.2
- 1.0.3
- 1.1
- 1.1.0
- 1.1.1
- 1.1.2
- 1.2
- 1.2.0
- 1.3
- 1.3.0
- 1.3.1
- 1.4
- 1.4.0
- 1.4.1
- 1.4.2
- 1.4.3
- 1.5
- 1.5.0
- 1.5.1
- 1.6.0
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.fortinet.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 3.5VulDB Meta Temp Score: 3.5
VulDB Base Score: 2.0
VulDB Temp Score: 2.0
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 4.4
NVD Vector: 🔒
CNA Base Score: 4.2
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: Cleartext storage in memoryCWE: CWE-316 / CWE-312 / CWE-310
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Partially
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
09/30/2025 CVE reserved11/18/2025 Advisory disclosed
11/18/2025 VulDB entry created
11/20/2025 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Vendor: fortinet.comAdvisory: FG-IR-25-789
Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2025-61713 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-61713
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-332845
Entry
Created: 11/18/2025 20:20Updated: 11/20/2025 15:51
Changes: 11/18/2025 20:20 (62), 11/20/2025 15:51 (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.