FortiportalApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2017-7343
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 open redirect vulnerability in Fortinet FortiPortal 4.0.0 and below allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via the url parameter.
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 confidenceFortinet FortiPortal 4.0.0 and below contains an open redirect vulnerability in the url parameter. Attackers can craft malicious URLs to redirect users to arbitrary external sites, potentially leading to phishing attacks or credential theft.
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.
-
Confirm FortiPortal installationLocate the FortiPortal installation directory or check for running processes. Common paths may include /opt/fortiportal or check service status via 'systemctl status fortiportal' or 'ps aux | grep -i fortiportal'.Affected if FortiPortal is installed and running on the system.
-
Identify installed versionCheck the FortiPortal version by logging into the admin interface and navigating to System > Settings > About, or by examining version files in the installation directory if accessible.Affected if The installed version is 4.0.0 or lower.
-
Verify web interface accessibilityAccess the FortiPortal web login page via browser or curl command (e.g., curl -k https://<host>/fpportal/). Confirm the application responds on standard HTTP/HTTPS ports.Affected if The FortiPortal web interface is accessible over the network.
-
Test url parameter for open redirectSend a crafted request with an external domain in the url parameter, such as: curl -k 'https://<host>/fpportal/login?url=http://evil.com'. Observe if the application responds with a 302 redirect to the external domain.Affected if The application redirects to the arbitrary domain specified in the url parameter without proper validation.
If FortiPortal version 4.0.0 or below is installed and the web interface is accessible, the environment is likely affected by this open redirect vulnerability.
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 strict allowlist-based validation for the url parameter, ensuring only trusted domains are permitted for redirects. Consider using a fixed list of approved redirect destinations or validating against the application's own domain.
Fix this in Fortiportal
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7343 — 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-2017-7343 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