CVE-2017-7739
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 reflected Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in web proxy disclaimer response web pages in Fortinet FortiOS 5.6.0, 5.4.0 to 5.4.5, 5.2.0 to 5.2.11 allows an unauthenticated attacker to inject arbitrary web script or HTML in the context of the victim's browser via sending a maliciously crafted URL to the victim.
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 confidenceReflected XSS vulnerability in FortiOS web proxy disclaimer response pages allows unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript/HTML via maliciously crafted URLs. The vulnerability affects FortiOS 5.6.0, 5.4.0-5.4.5, and 5.2.0-5.2.11.
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= 5.2.0= 5.2.1= 5.2.2= 5.2.3= 5.2.4= 5.2.5= 5.2.6= 5.2.7= 5.2.8= 5.2.9= 5.2.10= 5.2.11CVSS 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.
-
Check FortiOS versionRun 'get system status' on the FortiGate CLI or check the web UI dashboard for the firmware versionAffected if Version is 5.2.0 through 5.2.11, 5.4.0 through 5.4.5, or 5.6.0
-
Verify web proxy feature is enabledRun 'show web-proxy' or 'config web-proxy' then 'get' to display web proxy configuration settingsAffected if Web proxy is enabled and configured with disclaimer responses
-
Confirm disclaimer page configuration existsRun 'config web-proxy global' and check for 'proxy-internal' or disclaimer-related settings; look for 'explicit-web-proxy' under system interfaceAffected if Explicit web proxy with disclaimer pages is configured
You are affected if your FortiOS version falls within 5.2.0-5.2.11, 5.4.0-5.4.5, or 5.6.0 AND the explicit web proxy with disclaimer responses is enabled.
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 dataApply the appropriate FortiOS firmware update from Fortinet that addresses CVE-2017-7739. Upgrade to a patched version as specified in Fortinet's security advisory.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7739 — 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-2017-7739 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