FortiwlcApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2017-7341
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 · uneditedAn OS Command Injection vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWLC 6.1-2 through 6.1-5, 7.0-7 through 7.0-10, 8.0 through 8.2, and 8.3.0 through 8.3.2 file management AP script download webUI page allows an authenticated admin user to execute arbitrary system console commands via crafted HTTP requests.
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 · high confidenceOS Command Injection vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWLC (wireless LAN controller) file management AP script download webUI page allows authenticated admin users to execute arbitrary system console commands via crafted HTTP requests. Affects versions 6.1-2 through 6.1-5, 7.0-7 through 7.0-10, 8.0 through 8.2, and 8.3.0 through 8.3.2.
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
FortiwlcApplication
>= 6.1-2, <= 6.1-5>= 7.0-7, <= 7.0-10>= 8.0, <= 8.2>= 8.3.0, <= 8.3.2CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 FortiWLC software versionLog into the FortiWLC CLI and run the command 'show system information' or access the webUI dashboard to view the firmware version displayedAffected if The displayed version falls within 6.1-2 to 6.1-5, 7.0-7 to 7.0-10, 8.0 to 8.2, or 8.3.0 to 8.3.2
-
Verify webUI access is enabledCheck the webUI service status via CLI command 'show web-management' or review the HTTP/HTTPS listener configurationAffected if The webUI HTTP or HTTPS service is listening and accessible
-
Confirm admin account existenceReview enabled administrative accounts using 'show admin' CLI command or inspect user accounts in the webUI under Administration > Admin UsersAffected if Any administrative accounts are active on the system
-
Identify exposure of AP script download featureLocate the file management or AP script download page in the webUI by navigating to the relevant management section or examining HTTP endpoints for download functionalityAffected if The AP script download webUI page is accessible and operational
You are affected if your FortiWLC version falls within the listed vulnerable ranges AND the webUI is accessible with valid admin credentials, allowing access to the file management AP script download functionality.
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 dataUpgrade FortiWLC to vendor-patched version. As immediate mitigation, restrict admin UI access to trusted networks only and audit administrative accounts.
Fix this in Fortiwlc
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7341 — 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-2017-7341 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