FortitesterApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2022-35846
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 restriction of excessive authentication attempts vulnerability [CWE-307] in FortiTester Telnet port 2.3.0 through 3.9.1, 4.0.0 through 4.2.0, 7.0.0 through 7.1.0 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to guess the credentials of an admin user via a brute force attack.
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 confidenceFortiTester's Telnet service (versions 2.3.0-3.9.1, 4.0.0-4.2.0, 7.0.0-7.1.0) lacks proper rate limiting or account lockout on authentication attempts, allowing unauthenticated attackers to brute force admin credentials via the Telnet port.
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
FortitesterApplication
>= 2.3.0, < 3.9.2>= 4.0.0, < 4.2.1>= 7.0.0, < 7.1.1CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 if FortiTester is installedLocate FortiTester installation directory or check system for FortiTester processes. Common paths include /opt/fortitester or C:\Program Files\Fortinet\FortiTester on Linux/Windows systems respectively.Affected if FortiTester software is present on the system
-
Determine installed FortiTester versionCheck the FortiTester version through the web UI (System > Settings > About), CLI command 'get system status', or by inspecting version files in the installation directory.Affected if Installed version falls within >= 2.3.0 and < 3.9.2, OR >= 4.0.0 and < 4.2.1, OR >= 7.0.0 and < 7.1.1
-
Verify Telnet service is enabledCheck FortiTester network settings or firewall rules to confirm Telnet service (port 23) is accessible and enabled on the appliance.Affected if Telnet service is enabled and listening on network interfaces
-
Assess Telnet exposure to untrusted networksReview firewall rules, network access lists, or interface bindings to determine if Telnet port 23 is exposed to public or untrusted networks rather than limited to management IPs.Affected if Telnet port is reachable from untrusted or external networks without IP restrictions
-
Check for authentication rate limiting or account lockout policiesReview FortiTester authentication settings under System > Administration > Settings to verify if account lockout or rate limiting is configured for Telnet logins.Affected if No account lockout threshold or rate limiting is configured for Telnet authentication attempts
User is affected if FortiTester is running a vulnerable version (2.3.0-3.9.1, 4.0.0-4.2.0, or 7.0.0-7.1.0) with Telnet service enabled and exposed to networks where attackers could perform brute force attacks.
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 · scoped3.9.24.2.17.1.1
Upgrade to a patched version if available; otherwise, disable Telnet access or restrict network access to trusted IPs to reduce attack surface.
FortiTester 3.9.2, 4.2.1, or 7.1.1 (depending on your current branch)
- Identify the current FortiTester version running in your environment
- Based on the current version, determine the appropriate upgrade path: for 2.3.0-3.9.x upgrade to 3.9.2 or later; for 4.0.0-4.2.x upgrade to 4.2.1 or later; for 7.0.0-7.1.x upgrade to 7.1.1 or later
- Obtain the fixed version from the Fortinet support portal (support.fortinet.com)
- Follow standard FortiTester upgrade procedures documented in the FortiTester administration guide
- After upgrade, verify the version and confirm the Telnet service is properly secured
- Consider disabling Telnet if not required, or restricting access to Telnet port via firewall rules
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Fortitester
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-35846 — 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-2022-35846 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