FortimailApplication · Fortinet
CVE-2023-36633
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 authorization vulnerability [CWE-285] in FortiMail webmail version 7.2.0 through 7.2.2 and before 7.0.5 allows an authenticated attacker to see and modify the title of address book folders of other users via crafted HTTP or HTTPs 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 confidenceAn improper authorization vulnerability (CWE-285) in FortiMail webmail versions 7.2.0-7.2.2 and before 7.0.5 allows authenticated attackers to view and modify the titles of address book folders belonging to other users through specially crafted HTTP/HTTPS requests. This represents a horizontal privilege escalation where one authenticated user can access/modify another user's address book data.
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
FortimailApplication
>= 6.0.0, < 7.0.6>= 7.2.0, < 7.2.3CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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 FortiMail versionAccess the FortiMail administrative interface or CLI and retrieve the firmware version. In the GUI, go to Dashboard > System Information > Firmware. Or use CLI command: get system statusAffected if The installed version falls within < 7.0.6 for 7.0.x branch, or >= 7.2.0 and < 7.2.3 for 7.2.x branch, or >= 6.0.0 and < 7.0.6 for 6.0.x branch
-
Confirm webmail service is enabledCheck if FortiMail webmail interface is accessible to users. In FortiMail GUI, go to Domain & User > Domain > (select domain) > Webmail Settings, or use CLI: get webmail detailedAffected if Webmail service is enabled and users have authenticated access to the system
-
Review address book folder modificationsInspect the address book configuration or database for folder title changes. Query FortiMail logs or database for entries where address book folder titles were modified outside of normal user activity. Look for folder modification events that show different user ownershipAffected if Folder title modifications exist for address books belonging to users other than the requester, indicating unauthorized cross-user access
-
Analyze webmail HTTP/HTTPS access logsReview FortiMail webmail access logs for unusual API requests targeting address book endpoints. Look for requests to /webmail/addressbook or similar endpoints with parameter manipulation that may indicate horizontal privilege escalation attemptsAffected if Logs show requests accessing another user's address book folder titles through crafted HTTP/HTTPS requests with unusual parameter patterns
-
Check for unauthorized user session anomaliesExamine webmail session logs and user activity records to identify if any user accessed or modified another user's address book data. Compare session user IDs with the owner IDs of modified address book foldersAffected if Session records show a user accessing address book resources owned by a different user account
A user is affected if FortiMail version is 7.0.x before 7.0.6, 7.2.0-7.2.2, or 6.0.0-6.x before 7.0.6 AND there is evidence of unauthorized cross-user address book folder title access in logs or configuration.
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 · scoped7.0.67.2.3
Upgrade FortiMail to version 7.0.5 or later (for 7.0.x branch) or version 7.2.3 or later (for 7.2.x branch) to remediate this improper authorization vulnerability.
FortiMail 7.0.6 or later; FortiMail 7.2.3 or later
- 1. Log into FortiMail webmail or admin interface
- 2. Navigate to System > Status or Dashboard to confirm current firmware version
- 3. If version is 7.0.x (where x < 6), download FortiMail firmware 7.0.6 from Fortinet support portal
- 4. If version is 7.2.x (where x < 3), download FortiMail firmware 7.2.3 or later from Fortinet support portal
- 5. Go to System > FortiGuard > Firmware or Maintenance > Firmware
- 6. Upload and install the appropriate firmware file
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is installed and test that address book access controls function correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Fortimail
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-36633 — 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-2023-36633 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