CVE-2020-29014
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 concurrent execution using shared resource with improper synchronization ('race condition') in the command shell of FortiSandbox before 3.2.2 may allow an authenticated attacker to bring the system into an unresponsive state via specifically orchestrated sequences of commands.
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 confidenceA race condition vulnerability exists in the command shell interface of FortiSandbox versions prior to 3.2.2. An authenticated attacker with CLI access can exploit improper synchronization in command processing by sending specifically crafted sequences of commands concurrently, causing the system to become unresponsive (Denial of Service).
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< 3.2.2CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 installed FortiSandbox versionAccess the FortiSandbox CLI or web GUI and retrieve the firmware version. In CLI, this is typically shown on login or via 'get system status' command. In the web GUI, check System > Firmware or the dashboard for the version number.Affected if The installed version is any release prior to 3.2.2 (for example, 3.2.0, 3.1.x, 3.0.x, or earlier).
-
Confirm CLI access is enabledVerify that the command line interface is accessible. Check via SSH to the management IP on port 22, or via console access. Use 'show system interface' or check the web GUI under System > Network > Interfaces to confirm CLI-facing interfaces are enabled.Affected if CLI access is available to authenticated users, particularly if accessible over network interfaces not restricted to management-only IP addresses.
-
Review user accounts with CLI privilegesCheck the list of administrative users and their access levels. In the web GUI, go to System > Administrators to see which users have CLI or shell access permissions. In CLI, use 'get admin user' to list accounts.Affected if There are multiple administrative accounts, or any account other than a sole dedicated administrator, with CLI access permissions.
-
Monitor for system responsiveness issuesCheck system health and responsiveness indicators. Look for symptoms such as: CLI commands timing out or hanging, delayed web GUI responses, increased CPU or memory usage, or logged events showing 'system busy' or service unavailability. Use 'diagnose system top' or similar diagnostic commands if available.Affected if The system exhibits periodic or intermittent unresponsiveness, particularly following periods of heavy CLI command activity.
-
Review audit logs for concurrent command patternsExamine CLI audit logs or event logs for unusual patterns of rapidly executed, concurrent commands. Look for multiple CLI sessions executing commands in tight succession or overlapping time windows. Check under Log & Report > Event Log or via 'execute log' commands.Affected if Audit logs show sequences of concurrent CLI commands from the same or different sessions that appear unusual or crafted.
A user is affected if their FortiSandbox version is below 3.2.2 AND the CLI interface is accessible to authenticated attackers who could send concurrent command sequences to cause denial of service.
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 data3.2.2
Upgrade FortiSandbox to version 3.2.2 or later to receive the vendor patch. Limit CLI access to trusted administrative personnel and monitor for unusual command patterns.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $1,904.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-29014 — 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-2020-29014 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