ForticlientApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2022-45856
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 certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 6.4 all versions, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, FortiClientMac 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientLinux 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientAndroid 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 and FortiClientiOS 5.6 all versions, 6.0.0 through 6.0.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6 SAML SSO feature may allow an unauthenticated attacker to man-in-the-middle the communication between the FortiClient and both the service provider and the identity provider.
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 confidenceFortiClient's SAML SSO feature fails to properly validate SSL/TLS certificates, allowing an unauthenticated attacker to intercept communications between FortiClient and both the service provider and identity provider through a man-in-the-middle attack. This improper certificate validation (CWE-295) affects Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, and iOS versions across multiple release branches.
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
ForticlientApplication
>= 5.0, < 7.2.1>= 6.4, < 7.2.5>= 6.4, < 7.0.8>= 2.0, < 7.0.7CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 installed FortiClient versionOn Windows, open Programs and Features or run 'forticlient --version' from command line. On Mac, run 'forticlient --version' in Terminal or check /Applications/FortiClient.app. On Linux, run 'forticlient --version' or check via package manager. On mobile, check the app version in the device's app store or installed apps settings.Affected if The installed version falls within these ranges: 5.0.x to <7.0.7, 6.4.x to <7.0.8, 7.0.x to <7.0.8, 7.2.x to <7.2.1 or <7.2.5 (exact minimum depends on release branch). Compare your version to these affected ranges.
-
Confirm SAML SSO feature is in useReview FortiClient configuration to determine if SAML SSO (Single Sign-On) is enabled. On Windows/Mac/Linux, open FortiClient GUI and check the SAML settings under 'Remote Access' or 'SAML VPN' sections. Look for any configured Identity Provider (IdP) connections.Affected if SAML SSO feature is configured or actively used, meaning the client is making SAML-based authentication connections to identity providers.
-
Inspect certificate validation behaviorSince direct inspection of the validation logic is not possible from the client side, check if the SAML IdP configuration specifies 'Validate certificate' or similar options are enabled. Capture network traffic during SAML authentication with a packet analyzer to observe whether certificate chain validation occurs (the vulnerability allows connections to proceed without proper validation).Affected if SAML SSO connections succeed even when the IdP certificate is invalid, expired, or from an untrusted chain, indicating the validation weakness is present.
A user is affected if FortiClient is installed with a version in the affected ranges AND SAML SSO feature is enabled or configured, allowing potential man-in-the-middle interception of SAML authentication traffic.
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 · scoped7.0.77.0.87.2.1
Apply vendor-supplied patches or upgrade to FortiClient versions that address the certificate validation vulnerability; ensure SAML SSO configurations use proper certificate chain verification.
FortiClient 7.0.8 or later, or 7.2.5 (or later for respective platforms)
- 1. Identify the current FortiClient version installed on each endpoint (Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS)
- 2. For FortiClient Windows 6.4.x: upgrade to version 7.0.8 or 7.2.5 (or later)
- 3. For FortiClient Windows 7.0.x: upgrade to version 7.0.8 or later
- 4. For FortiClient Mac 6.4.x or 7.0.x: upgrade to version 7.0.8 or 7.2.5 (or later)
- 5. For FortiClient Mac 7.2.x: upgrade to version 7.2.5 or later
- 6. For FortiClient Linux 6.4.x or 7.0.x: upgrade to version 7.0.8 or 7.2.5 (or later)
- 7. For FortiClient Linux 7.2.x: upgrade to version 7.2.5 or later
- 8. For FortiClient Android 6.4.x or 7.0.x: upgrade to version 7.2.1 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Forticlient
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-2022-45856 — 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-2022-45856 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