dbcve.org
FortianalyzerApplication · Fortinet

CVE-2020-12811

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-09-24
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 6.2.6 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 · unedited
An improper neutralization of script-related HTML tags in a web page in FortiManager 6.2.0, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3and FortiAnalyzer 6.2.0, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3 may allow an attacker to execute a cross site scripting (XSS) via the Identify Provider name field.

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 confidence

A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Identify Provider name field of FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer versions 6.2.0 through 6.2.3 allows attackers to inject malicious script-related HTML tags that execute in the context of other users' sessions when they view the affected field.

MitigationUpgrade to FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer version 6.2.4 or later per Fortinet's advisory. Until patched, limit administrative access to trusted personnel and monitor for suspicious activity in the Identify Provider configuration area.

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
FortianalyzerApplication
Affected:>= 6.2.0, <= 6.2.6
FortimanagerApplication
Affected:>= 6.2.0, <= 6.2.6

CVSS 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:3.1/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm product is FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer
    Access the web UI or CLI and identify the device type. In CLI, run 'get system status' to verify the product name.
    Affected if The device is FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer
  2. Check installed firmware version
    In the web UI, go to System > Settings > Firmware or use CLI command 'get system status' to view the current version.
    Affected if The version is 6.2.0 through 6.2.6 (specifically 6.2.0 to 6.2.3 is explicitly mentioned in the summary, and 6.2.0 to 6.2.6 in the affected range)
  3. Verify if Identify Provider feature is configured
    In the web UI, navigate to System > SAML IdP or Certificate > SAML IdP (path may vary by version). Check if any Identity Provider entries exist.
    Affected if Identify Provider entries are configured in the system
  4. Inspect Identify Provider name fields for malicious content
    Access the SAML IdP configuration page and examine each entry's 'Name' or 'IdP Name' field. Look for unexpected HTML tags, script elements, or encoded payloads.
    Affected if Any Identify Provider name field contains HTML script tags or suspicious encoded content
  5. Review logs for suspicious Identify Provider activity
    Use Log & Report > Event Log or CLI 'execute log filter' to search for SAML IdP-related events. Look for unauthorized modifications or unknown admin activity.
    Affected if Logs show unexpected changes to Identify Provider configuration by unknown administrators

You are affected if you run FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer version 6.2.0-6.2.6, have Identify Provider configured, and the IdP name field contains malicious script-related HTML tags.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 6.2.6
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer version 6.2.4 or later per Fortinet's advisory. Until patched, limit administrative access to trusted personnel and monitor for suspicious activity in the Identify Provider configuration area.

Fix this in Fortianalyzer Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get the upgrade done

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-12811 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-12811 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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