VulnerabilityPublished 18 Nov 2025Updated 14 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-54972: Fortinet FortiMail · Information Disclosure

Affects Fortinet FortiMailSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 3.9 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.9Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 11% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 18 Nov 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 FortiMail	Affected 7.0.0 – 7.6.0 4 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Fortinet advisories closely and apply official patches or updates as soon as they become available to address CVE-2025-54972.
Implement strict URL filtering and email gateway policies to reduce the risk of users clicking on maliciously crafted links that could trigger the vulnerability.
Educate users about the risks of clicking unknown or suspicious links, especially those received via email.
Configure FortiMail and associated network devices to enforce strict HTTP header validation and sanitization where possible.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) or intrusion prevention systems (IPS) that can detect and block CRLF injection attempts targeting FortiMail interfaces.
Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on email security appliances to identify and remediate similar injection flaws proactively.
Maintain comprehensive logging and monitoring of FortiMail HTTP traffic to detect unusual header manipulations or injection attempts.
Segment FortiMail management interfaces from general user networks to limit exposure and reduce attack surface.
Review and harden email security policies to minimize the impact of potential header injection attacks, including disabling unnecessary HTTP services or interfaces on FortiMail appliances.

Description

An improper neutralization of crlf sequences ('crlf injection') vulnerability in Fortinet FortiMail 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiMail 7.4.0 through 7.4.5, FortiMail 7.2 all versions, FortiMail 7.0 all versions may allow an attacker to inject headers in the response via convincing a user to click on a specifically crafted link

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-54972 is limited information disclosure and potential minor integrity issues within email security infrastructure. Since FortiMail is commonly deployed in enterprises and government agencies across Europe to protect email communications, exploitation could undermine trust in email filtering and security mechanisms. Although the vulnerability does not allow direct data exfiltration or denial of service, attackers might leverage it to craft phishing campaigns or bypass certain security controls by manipulating HTTP headers. This could lead to targeted social engineering attacks or facilitate further exploitation. The requirement for user interaction reduces the likelihood of widespread automated exploitation, but high-value targets such as financial institutions, critical infrastructure operators, and government entities remain at risk due to their reliance on FortiMail. The low CVSS score suggests limited immediate operational impact, but the strategic importance of email security in Europe means that even minor vulnerabilities can have cascading effects if chained with other exploits. Additionally, regulatory compliance frameworks such as GDPR emphasize the protection of personal data, and any information disclosure incident could have legal and reputational consequences.

References

fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-25-634 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Jan 2026, 15:00 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats