CVE-2023-47543
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 authorization bypass through user-controlled key vulnerability [CWE-639] in Fortinet FortiPortal version 7.0.0 through 7.0.3 allows an authenticated attacker to interact with ressources of other organizations via 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 confidenceFortiPortal 7.0.0-7.0.3 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability (CWE-639) where an authenticated attacker can manipulate user-controlled keys in HTTP/HTTPS requests to access resources belonging to other organizations (tenants), effectively bypassing multi-tenant isolation controls.
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>= 7.0.0, < 7.0.4CVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 FortiPortal versionAccess the FortiPortal admin interface and navigate to System > Settings > About, or run the command 'fwmanager -i | grep -i portal' on the FortiGate connected to FortiPortal, or check the /opt/fortiportal/version file if you have CLI access.Affected if The installed version is 7.0.0 through 7.0.3 inclusive.
-
Confirm multi-tenant feature is enabledLog into FortiPortal admin console and navigate to Administration > Organizations or check the multi-tenant configuration settings. Look for multiple organization/tenant definitions configured in the system.Affected if More than one organization/tenant is defined and active in FortiPortal.
-
Review tenant access audit logsCheck FortiPortal logs under Log & Report > Event Logs or access the audit log database. Search for access events where organization_id or tenant_id values in requests do not match the authenticated user's organization.Affected if Logs show access records where user sessions accessed resources with mismatched organization identifiers.
-
Inspect HTTP request parameters for tenant ID manipulationIf you have access to HTTP access logs or proxy logs for FortiPortal, examine requests for parameter names like org_id, tenantId, organization_id, or similar that control tenant assignment. Look for requests where these values differ from the authenticated user's actual organization.Affected if Logs contain requests with tenant/organization parameters that differ from the user's authenticated organization.
-
Check for unexpected cross-tenant resource accessReview resource access reports or data exports for records where resources (reports, dashboards, data exports) created by one organization were accessed by users from a different organization.Affected if Audit or access logs show users accessing data, reports, or resources belonging to organizations different from their own.
You are affected if FortiPortal version is 7.0.0-7.0.3 AND multi-tenant isolation is in use, with evidence of cross-tenant access or potential for such access.
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 · scoped7.0.4
Upgrade FortiPortal to version 7.0.4 or later to remediate this authorization bypass. This is the only reliable fix as the vulnerability allows cross-tenant resource access.
FortiPortal 7.0.4 or later
- Download FortiPortal version 7.0.4 or later from the Fortinet Support Portal (support.fortinet.com)
- Review the FortiPortal 7.0.4 release notes and upgrade guide for any specific migration requirements
- Create a full backup of the current FortiPortal configuration and database
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade FortiPortal to version 7.0.4 or latest available 7.0.x release
- Verify the upgrade completed successfully by checking the FortiPortal version in the web UI or CLI
- Confirm the vulnerability is remediated by validating that cross-organization resource access is now properly restricted
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-47543 — 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-2023-47543 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