Forticlient Enterprise Management ServerApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2020-15940
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 improper neutralization of input vulnerability [CWE-79] in FortiClientEMS versions 6.4.1 and below and 6.2.9 and below may allow a remote authenticated attacker to inject malicious script/tags via the name parameter of various sections of the server.
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 (CWE-79) in FortiClientEMS where an authenticated remote attacker can inject malicious script/tags through the name parameter in various sections of the management console. The injected payload persists and executes in the browsers of other users viewing the affected sections.
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
Forticlient Enterprise Management ServerApplication
>= 6.0.0, <= 6.0.8>= 6.2.0, <= 6.2.9>= 6.4.0, <= 6.4.1CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 FortiClientEMS versionLog into the FortiClientEMS management console and navigate to the System Settings or About section to view the installed version. Alternatively, use the CLI command 'get system status' or check the Windows Programs and Features list for the FortiClientEMS version.Affected if The installed version falls within 6.0.0 to 6.0.8, 6.2.0 to 6.2.9, or 6.4.0 to 6.4.1.
-
Confirm management console accessibilityVerify that the FortiClientEMS web management interface is reachable on the configured port (default 80/443). Check network exposure and whether the console is accessible to unauthorized users.Affected if The management console is exposed to untrusted networks or users without proper network segmentation.
-
Review user account privilegesExamine the list of users and their assigned roles in the FortiClientEMS management console under User Management or Administrator settings.Affected if Multiple users exist with privileges to modify name parameters in sections such as endpoints, policies, or other management areas.
-
Inspect name fields for potential payloadsManually review the name fields in sections like endpoint names, policy names, or group names within the management console for any unexpected characters or script tags that may indicate prior exploitation.Affected if Suspicious script tags or encoded payloads are present in any name fields accessible through the console.
The environment is affected if FortiClientEMS version is 6.0.0 through 6.0.8, 6.2.0 through 6.2.9, or 6.4.0 through 6.4.1 and the management console is accessible to authenticated users who can modify name parameters.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade FortiClientEMS to version 6.4.2 or higher (or 6.3.0 and above), which contains the patched version. Alternatively, implement output encoding and input validation on all user-supplied name parameters as a compensating control.
FortiClient EMS 6.0.9+, 6.2.10+, or 6.4.2+ (upgrade to the latest available version in your supported branch)
- 1. Identify the current FortiClient EMS version by checking the About section in the management console or running 'get system status' via CLI
- 2. Navigate to the Fortinet Support Portal at https://support.fortinet.com/ and locate the FortiClient EMS download section
- 3. Download the appropriate fixed version for your current branch: version 6.0.9 or later for 6.0.x, version 6.2.10 or later for 6.2.x, or version 6.4.2 or later for 6.4.x
- 4. Backup the current EMS configuration from the System > Settings > Configuration Backup menu
- 5. Stop the FortiClient EMS service before applying the upgrade
- 6. Run the installer for the fixed version and follow the on-screen prompts
- 7. After installation completes, restart the FortiClient EMS service
- 8. Verify the version has been updated by checking System > Settings > About in the management console
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Forticlient Enterprise Management Server
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-15940 — 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-2020-15940 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