CVE-2024-45329VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-45329: Fortinet FortiPortal · Improper access control

Affects Fortinet FortiPortalSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.9 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.9Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

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

Temporal metrics

Exploit Code Maturity: Proof-of-Concept
Remediation Level: Official Fix
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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.
Remediation Level: Official Fix: A complete vendor solution is available. Either the vendor has issued an official patch, or an upgrade is available.
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 10 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
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), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

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 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 FortiPortal	Affected =7.4.0 =7.2.0 =7.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Immediately review and restrict access controls to FortiPortal, ensuring that only necessary personnel have authenticated access, and enforce the principle of least privilege. 2) Monitor API request logs for unusual or unauthorized key modifications that could indicate exploitation attempts. 3) Employ network segmentation to isolate FortiPortal management interfaces from general user networks, reducing the risk of unauthorized access. 4) Stay alert for official patches or updates from Fortinet addressing CVE-2024-45329 and apply them promptly once available. 5) Conduct internal audits and penetration testing focusing on API authorization mechanisms to detect similar weaknesses. 6) Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for FortiPortal access to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 7) Educate administrators about the risks of API misuse and encourage reporting of suspicious activities related to FortiPortal.

Description

A authorization bypass through user-controlled key in Fortinet FortiPortal versions 7.4.0, versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.5, and versions 7.0.0 through 7.0.8 may allow an authenticated attacker to view unauthorized device information via key modification in API requests.

Impact

For European organizations using Fortinet FortiPortal, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive device information managed through the portal. Such information could include device configurations, network topology details, or other metadata that an attacker could leverage for further reconnaissance or targeted attacks. Although the vulnerability does not directly allow modification or disruption of services, the exposure of device information can aid attackers in planning more sophisticated attacks, potentially compromising network security. Organizations in sectors with stringent data protection requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, may face compliance risks if unauthorized data disclosure occurs. The impact is somewhat mitigated by the requirement for attacker authentication, limiting exploitation to insiders or compromised accounts. However, given FortiPortal's role in managing network devices, even limited unauthorized access can have cascading effects on network security posture.

References

fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-274 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Jul 2025, 22:48 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats