VulnerabilityPublished 14 Oct 2025Updated 14 Jan 2026

CVE-2024-26008: Fortinet FortiProxy · Denial of Service

Affects Fortinet FortiProxySource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:29 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 47% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L/E:P/RL:X/RC:C

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

Temporal metrics

Exploit Code Maturity: Proof-of-Concept
Report Confidence: Confirmed

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Exploit Code Maturity: Proof-of-Concept: Proof-of-concept exploit code is available, or an attack demonstration is not practical for most systems. The code or technique is not functional in all situations and may require substantial modification by a skilled attacker.
Report Confidence: Confirmed: Detailed reports exist, or functional reproduction is possible (functional exploits may provide this). Source code is available to independently verify the assertions of the research, or the author or vendor of the affected code has confirmed the presence of the vulnerability.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Oct 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Fortinet FortiProxy	Affected 1.2.0 – 7.4.0 5 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Fortinet’s official advisories and apply patches or firmware updates as soon as they become available for the affected Fortinet products and versions.
Implement network-level protections such as rate limiting and anomaly detection on SSL-encrypted TCP traffic targeting Fortinet management interfaces to detect and block suspicious fgfm connection reset attempts.
Restrict access to Fortinet management interfaces (fgfm daemon) to trusted internal networks or VPNs, minimizing exposure to unauthenticated external attackers.
Employ robust network segmentation to isolate critical Fortinet devices from general user traffic and potential attack sources.
Enable detailed logging and monitoring of fgfm connections to identify unusual reset patterns indicative of exploitation attempts.
Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focused on Fortinet infrastructure to verify the effectiveness of mitigations.
Prepare incident response plans specifically addressing potential denial of service scenarios affecting Fortinet devices to ensure rapid recovery and continuity.

Description

An improper check or handling of exceptional conditions vulnerability [CWE-703] in FortiOS version 7.4.0 through 7.4.3 and before 7.2.7, FortiProxy version 7.4.0 through 7.4.3 and before 7.2.9, FortiPAM before 1.2.0 and FortiSwitchManager version 7.2.0 through 7.2.3 and version 7.0.0 through 7.0.3 fgfm daemon may allow an unauthenticated attacker to repeatedly reset the fgfm connection via crafted SSL encrypted TCP requests.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2024-26008 is the potential disruption of network security and management services provided by Fortinet products. Denial of service on FortiProxy or FortiOS devices can interrupt secure web traffic filtering, VPN services, and firewall operations, leading to degraded network performance or outages. This can affect business continuity, especially for organizations relying heavily on Fortinet for perimeter defense and secure remote access. Critical infrastructure sectors such as finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and government agencies could experience operational disruptions. Additionally, repeated fgfm connection resets may complicate device management and monitoring, increasing the risk of delayed incident response. Although no data confidentiality or integrity impact is indicated, availability degradation can have cascading effects on dependent services and compliance with regulatory requirements like GDPR. The medium severity rating suggests moderate risk but warrants prompt attention due to the widespread use of affected Fortinet versions in Europe.

References

fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-041 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Jan 2026, 14:47 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats