FortiportalApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2017-7339
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA Cross-Site Scripting vulnerability in Fortinet FortiPortal versions 4.0.0 and below allows an attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via the 'Name' and 'Description' inputs in the 'Add Revision Backup' functionality.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis is a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Fortinet FortiPortal versions 4.0.0 and below. The 'Name' and 'Description' input fields in the 'Add Revision Backup' functionality fail to properly sanitize user-supplied input, allowing attackers to inject malicious JavaScript code that executes in the browsers of other users who view the backup information.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
FortiportalApplication
<= 4.0.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify FortiPortal installation and versionLocate the FortiPortal application and determine its installed version through the web interface (typically in System > Settings > About) or by checking the installation directory for version filesAffected if The installed version is FortiPortal 4.0.0 or below
-
Confirm Add Revision Backup feature existsNavigate to the backup/revision management section of the FortiPortal web interface and locate the 'Add Revision Backup' functionalityAffected if The Add Revision Backup feature is present and accessible in the application
-
Verify Name and Description input fields are presentAccess the Add Revision Backup form and identify the 'Name' and 'Description' input fieldsAffected if Both Name and Description input fields exist in the Add Revision Backup form
-
Test input sanitization behaviorSubmit test payloads containing HTML/script characters (e.g., <script>alert(1)</script>) in the Name and Description fields, then view the stored backup to check if the payload is executed or rendered as raw textAffected if The submitted payload is stored and rendered as executable HTML/JavaScript when viewed by another user (indicating lack of output encoding)
The environment is affected if FortiPortal version 4.0.0 or below is running and the Add Revision Backup Name/Description fields do not properly sanitize or encode user input before storage and display.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement proper input validation and output encoding/escaping for the Name and Description fields in the Add Revision Backup functionality to neutralize any malicious script content before storage and upon display.
Fix this in Fortiportal
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7339 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-7339 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data