CVE-2024-54026VulnerabilityPublished 11 Mar 2025Updated 14 Jan 2026

CVE-2024-54026: Fortinet FortiSandbox · Execute unauthorized code or commands

Affects Fortinet FortiSandboxSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 35% 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:X/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
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.
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 11 Mar 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 2026-10-26.

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 FortiSandbox	Affected =4.4.0 =4.2.1 =4.0.0 =3.2.0 =3.1.0 =3.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Apply official patches from Fortinet immediately once available for all affected FortiSandbox versions. 2. Restrict network access to FortiSandbox management and API interfaces using firewalls and VPNs to limit exposure to trusted administrators only. 3. Implement strict authentication and authorization controls to prevent low-privilege accounts from exploiting the vulnerability. 4. Monitor FortiSandbox HTTP request logs for unusual or malformed requests indicative of SQL injection attempts. 5. Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) or intrusion prevention systems (IPS) with signatures to detect and block SQL injection payloads targeting FortiSandbox. 6. Conduct regular security audits and penetration tests focusing on FortiSandbox deployments to identify potential exploitation vectors. 7. Segment FortiSandbox appliances within secure network zones to reduce lateral movement risk if compromised. 8. Educate security teams about this vulnerability and ensure incident response plans include FortiSandbox compromise scenarios.

Description

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection') in Fortinet FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.6, FortiSandbox 4.2 all versions, FortiSandbox 4.0 all versions, FortiSandbox 3.2 all versions, FortiSandbox 3.1 all versions, FortiSandbox 3.0 all versions, FortiSandbox Cloud 24.1 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.

Impact

For European organizations, the vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized code execution on FortiSandbox appliances, potentially exposing sensitive threat intelligence data or enabling attackers to move laterally within networks. Since FortiSandbox is often deployed in critical infrastructure, financial institutions, and large enterprises for malware analysis and threat detection, exploitation could undermine security monitoring capabilities. Confidentiality breaches could lead to exposure of internal threat data or customer information. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact system integrity or availability, the ability to execute unauthorized commands could be leveraged for further attacks. The medium CVSS score reflects moderate risk, but the broad version impact and network accessibility mean many organizations could be vulnerable. European entities relying heavily on Fortinet products for cybersecurity defense should consider this a significant concern, especially those with exposed management interfaces or weak network segmentation.

References

fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-353 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Jan 2026, 14:43 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats