dbcve.org
FortisiemApplication · Fortinet

CVE-2022-42478

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-06-13
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 6.3.3 or later.
See remediation →
94/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts [CWE-307] in FortiSIEM below 7.0.0 may allow a non-privileged user with access to several endpoints to brute force attack these endpoints.

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

FortiSIEM versions below 7.0.0 fail to properly restrict excessive authentication attempts, allowing non-privileged users with access to certain endpoints to conduct brute force attacks against those endpoints. This is a CWE-307 vulnerability where the application does not implement adequate account lockout or rate-limiting mechanisms.

MitigationUpgrade FortiSIEM to version 7.0.0 or later to receive the fix for proper authentication attempt restrictions.

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
FortisiemApplication
Affected:>= 5.1.0, <= 5.1.3>= 5.3.0, <= 5.3.3>= 6.3.0, <= 6.3.3= 5.2.1= 5.2.2= 5.2.5= 5.2.6= 5.2.7= 5.2.8= 5.4.0= 6.1.0= 6.1.1

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checks

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

  1. Identify FortiSIEM version
    Run 'phds -v' or 'ls -la /opt/phoenix/bin/phds' from CLI, or check the FortiSIEM web UI under Admin > System Settings > General > Version
    Affected if The installed version matches any of these ranges: 5.1.0 to 5.1.3, 5.3.0 to 5.3.3, 6.3.0 to 6.3.3, or exactly 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.5, 5.2.6, 5.2.7, 5.2.8, 5.4.0, 6.1.0, or 6.1.1
  2. Confirm API/endpoints are accessible
    Verify that the FortiSIEM REST API or certain web service endpoints are exposed to untrusted networks or accessible to non-privileged users
    Affected if Endpoints such as /phoenix/rest/ or other authentication-related endpoints are reachable without proper network segmentation or access controls
  3. Check for rate limiting configuration
    Inspect FortiSIEM system configuration files or administrative settings for rate-limiting or account lockout policies. This may be found in /opt/phoenix/config/phoenix_config.xml or through the Supervisor web UI under System > Security > Authentication Policy
    Affected if No account lockout policy is configured after N failed attempts, or no rate limiting is enforced on authentication endpoints

If your FortiSIEM version is 5.1.0-5.1.3, 5.3.0-5.3.3, 6.3.0-6.3.3, or one of the specific versions 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.5, 5.2.6, 5.2.7, 5.2.8, 5.4.0, 6.1.0, or 6.1.1 AND authentication endpoints are exposed with no lockout/rate-limiting enabled, then you are affected.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 6.3.3
Interim mitigation

Upgrade FortiSIEM to version 7.0.0 or later to receive the fix for proper authentication attempt restrictions.

Recommended fix High confidence

FortiSIEM 7.0.0 or later

  1. Upgrade FortiSIEM to version 7.0.0 or later to resolve the authentication bypass vulnerability.
  2. Verify the upgrade was successful by confirming the new version in the FortiSIEM web interface or CLI.
  3. Test that the previously vulnerable endpoints now properly enforce account lockout policies after excessive failed authentication attempts.

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Fortisiem Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-42478 — 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-2022-42478 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