CVE-2023-29177
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 · uneditedMultiple buffer copy without checking size of input ('classic buffer overflow') vulnerabilities [CWE-120] in FortiADC version 7.2.0 and before 7.1.2 & FortiDDoS-F version 6.5.0 and before 6.4.1 allows a privileged attacker to execute arbitrary code or commands via specifically crafted CLI requests.
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 confidenceClassic buffer overflow (CWE-120) in FortiADC and FortiDDoS-F CLI parsing allows authenticated privileged attackers to execute arbitrary code via specially crafted requests with oversized parameters that overflow fixed-length buffers.
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>= 7.1.0, <= 7.1.2= 5.2.0= 5.3.0= 5.4.0= 6.0.0= 6.1.0= 6.2.0= 7.0.0= 7.2.0>= 6.1.0, <= 6.1.4>= 6.4.0, <= 6.4.1= 6.2.0= 6.3.0= 6.5.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 installed productDetermine whether the system is running FortiADC or FortiDDoS-F. This can typically be confirmed via the system dashboard, GUI about page, or CLI command 'get system status' or 'show system info'.Affected if The product is FortiADC or FortiDDoS-F.
-
Check FortiADC versionRun the CLI command 'get system status' or 'show system version' to display the installed FortiADC version number.Affected if The installed version is 7.1.0 through 7.1.2 inclusive, or exactly 5.2.0, 5.3.0, 5.4.0, 6.0.0, 6.1.0, 6.2.0, 7.0.0, or 7.2.0.
-
Check FortiDDoS-F versionRun the CLI command 'get system status' or 'show system info' to display the installed FortiDDoS-F version number.Affected if The installed version is 6.1.0 through 6.1.4 inclusive, 6.4.0 through 6.4.1 inclusive, or exactly 6.2.0, 6.3.0, or 6.5.0.
-
Assess CLI exposureVerify whether the CLI management interface is accessible. Check if CLI access is enabled for network interfaces (SSH/telnet to management ports) and review access control policies. The vulnerability requires CLI authentication to exploit.Affected if CLI interface is exposed and accessible to the attacker.
-
Review CLI audit logsExamine system logs for CLI command history or audit trails, looking for unusually long parameters or commands that may indicate exploitation attempts. Use 'execute log view' or similar log inspection commands.Affected if Logs show CLI commands with excessively long arguments or unexpected command patterns from privileged accounts.
A system is affected if it runs FortiADC version 7.1.0-7.1.2, 5.2.0, 5.3.0, 5.4.0, 6.0.0, 6.1.0, 6.2.0, 7.0.0, or 7.2.0, OR FortiDDoS-F version 6.1.0-6.1.4, 6.4.0-6.4.1, 6.2.0, 6.3.0, or 6.5.0, and has CLI interface accessible to authenticated privileged users.
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 · scopedUpgrade FortiADC to version 7.1.2 or later (7.2.0+) and FortiDDoS-F to version 6.4.1 or later. Restrict CLI access to trusted administrative accounts only and monitor for anomalous CLI activity.
FortiADC: upgrade to 7.1.2 or later; FortiDDoS-F: upgrade to 6.4.1 or later
- 1. Identify the exact FortiADC or FortiDDoS-F version currently installed using: get system status or version command
- 2. For FortiADC 7.1.x users: Upgrade to FortiADC version 7.1.2 or later to remediate the buffer overflow vulnerability
- 3. For FortiDDoS-F 6.4.x users: Upgrade to FortiDDoS-F version 6.4.1 or later to remediate the buffer overflow vulnerability
- 4. For FortiADC 5.2.0, 5.3.0, 5.4.0 and FortiDDoS-F 6.1.x-6.3.x: Contact Fortinet support for available patches or upgrade options as these older branches may require additional guidance
- 5. After upgrade, verify the fix by confirming the new version is running: get system status
- 6. Review FortiADC/FortiDDoS-F release notes for any post-upgrade configuration requirements
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-29177 — 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-2023-29177 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