CVE-2024-31492
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 external control of file name or path vulnerability [CWE-73] in FortiClientMac version 7.2.3 and below, version 7.0.10 and below installer may allow a local attacker to execute arbitrary code or commands via writing a malicious configuration file in /tmp before starting the installation process.
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 confidenceThe FortiClientMac installer version 7.2.3 and below, and 7.0.10 and below, reads configuration files from the /tmp directory without proper validation or sanitization. A local attacker with unprivileged access can place a malicious configuration file in /tmp before initiating the installer, which will be parsed and executed with elevated (root) privileges during the installation process, allowing arbitrary code execution.
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>= 7.0.6, < 7.0.11>= 7.2.0, < 7.2.4CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed FortiClientMac versionRun 'ls /Applications/ | grep -i forti' to locate the FortiClient app, then get version via 'pkgutil --pkg-info=FortiClient' or by inspecting the app bundle: 'defaults read /Applications/FortiClient.app/Contents/Info.plist CFBundleVersion'Affected if The installed version falls within 7.0.6 to 7.0.10 (inclusive) OR 7.2.0 to 7.2.3 (inclusive)
-
Identify FortiClientMac installer version usedCheck installer logs or receipts in /var/db/receipts for the installer package version: 'ls /var/db/receipts | grep -i forti' and then 'ls -la /var/db/receipts/*.bom' to examine receipt contentsAffected if The installer version used was 7.2.3 or below, or 7.0.10 or below, and installation was performed on a system where untrusted local users could write to /tmp
-
Verify /tmp directory permissionsRun 'ls -ld /tmp' and check if the directory is world-writable (drwxrwxrwt). Also check for sticky bit: 'ls -ld /tmp | grep t$'Affected if The /tmp directory allows untrusted local users to create files (world-writable without restricted permissions) - this enables the attack vector during installation
A user is affected if FortiClientMac version 7.0.6 through 7.0.10 or 7.2.0 through 7.2.3 is currently installed, or if an installer in these version ranges was previously run on a system where untrusted local users could write to /tmp.
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 · scoped7.0.117.2.4
Update FortiClientMac to version 7.2.4 (or later 7.2.x) or version 7.0.11 (or later 7.0.x) to obtain the patched installer. As a workaround, ensure the system is free of untrusted local users during installation and verify installer package integrity before execution.
FortiClient 7.0.11 or later (for 7.0.x users), or FortiClient 7.2.4 or later (for 7.2.x users)
- Verify current FortiClient version by opening FortiClient and checking About or Help > About
- Download the updated FortiClient installer (version 7.0.11 or later for 7.0.x line, or 7.2.4 or later for 7.2.x line) from the official Fortinet support portal or FortiGuard
- Close any running instances of FortiClient
- Run the downloaded installer with appropriate administrator privileges
- Follow the on-screen installation prompts to complete the upgrade
- After installation, verify the version by checking FortiClient > About to confirm the installed version is 7.0.11+ or 7.2.4+
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2024-31492 — 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-2024-31492 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