FortianalyzerApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2022-30304
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 during web page generation vulnerability [CWE-79] in FortiAnalyzer versions prior to 7.2.1, 7.0.4 and 6.4.8 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to perform a stored cross site scripting (XSS) attack via the URL parameter observed in the FortiWeb attack event logview in FortiAnalyzer.
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 confidenceThis is a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in FortiAnalyzer where the URL parameter in the FortiWeb attack event logview is not properly sanitized, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to inject malicious scripts that execute when viewed by other users.
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
>= 6.0.0, <= 6.0.11>= 6.2.0, <= 6.2.9>= 6.4.0, < 6.4.9>= 7.0.0, < 7.0.5= 7.2.0= 7.2.1CVSS 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
- 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify FortiAnalyzer versionRun the command 'get system status' or 'fnsysctl get system status' on the FortiAnalyzer CLI to retrieve the firmware versionAffected if The displayed version falls within these ranges: 6.0.0-6.0.11, 6.2.0-6.2.9, 6.4.0-6.4.8, 7.0.0-7.0.4, 7.2.0-7.2.1
-
Verify FortiWeb integration is activeCheck if FortiWeb devices or log receivers are configured in FortiAnalyzer by navigating to Device Manager or running ' diagnose device-versions list' in CLIAffected if FortiWeb attack event logging is enabled and FortiAnalyzer is receiving logs from FortiWeb devices, exposing the vulnerable logview interface
-
Inspect FortiWeb attack logs for XSS payloadsNavigate to Log View > FortiWeb > Attack Event or use the CLI command 'execute log filter device FortiWeb' followed by 'execute log display' to review recent entriesAffected if Unusual script tags, javascript: URIs, or encoded payloads appear in URL, host, or referrer fields within FortiWeb attack logs
-
Check for recent unauthorized log entriesReview authentication and log ingestion logs for sources without valid credentials adding entries to the FortiWeb event logAffected if Logs show log submissions from unauthenticated or unexpected sources to the FortiWeb attack log module
A FortiAnalyzer instance is affected if it runs a version within the affected ranges listed and has FortiWeb attack event logging enabled, with suspicious XSS payloads present in the logview.
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 · scoped6.4.97.0.5
Upgrade FortiAnalyzer to version 7.2.1, 7.0.4, or 6.4.8 or later to patch the input validation vulnerability.
Upgrade to FortiAnalyzer 6.4.8 (or later 6.4.x), 7.0.4 (or later 7.0.x), or 7.2.1 (or later 7.2.x) depending on your current branch
- 1. Identify the currently installed FortiAnalyzer version using the CLI command 'get system status' or through the web UI.
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on your current version: versions 6.0.x and 6.2.x should upgrade to 6.4.8 or later; version 6.4.x should upgrade to 6.4.8 or later; version 7.0.x should upgrade to 7.0.4 or later.
- 3. Backup the FortiAnalyzer configuration using 'execute backup all-settings' command.
- 4. Download the appropriate firmware upgrade from Fortinet's support portal (fortinet.com/support).
- 5. Upload the firmware via the FortiAnalyzer web UI (System Settings > Firmware) or via CLI using 'execute system firmware-upgrade' with the firmware file path.
- 6. After upgrade, verify the new version is installed using 'get system status'.
- 7. Verify the vulnerability is resolved by confirming the FortiWeb attack event logview no longer reflects unsanitized input.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Fortianalyzer
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-30304 — 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-2022-30304 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