CVE-2024-33502
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 limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('path traversal') in Fortinet FortiManager, FortiAnalyzer versions 7.4.0 through 7.4.2 and 7.2.0 through 7.2.5 and 7.0.0 through 7.0.12 and 6.4.0 through 6.4.14 and 6.2.0 through 6.2.12 and 6.0.0 through 6.0.12 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands 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 confidenceA path traversal vulnerability in FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer allows remote attackers to access restricted directories and potentially execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted HTTP/HTTPS requests containing directory traversal sequences.
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>= 6.0.0, < 7.2.6>= 7.4.0, < 7.4.3>= 6.0.0, < 7.2.6>= 7.4.0, < 7.4.3CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 product and versionRun the command 'get system status' via CLI or check the web UI dashboard to determine if the installed product is FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer and note the exact firmware version numberAffected if The version falls within 6.0.0 to 7.2.5, or 7.4.0 to 7.4.2
-
Confirm management interface exposureCheck network configuration to determine if the FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer web UI (HTTP/HTTPS on ports 80/443 or custom management ports) is accessible from untrusted networksAffected if The management interface is reachable from the internet or untrusted networks
-
Review web server logs for traversal patternsExamine HTTP access logs in /var/log/ or via the FortiView/logs interface for requests containing '../' sequences, such as 'GET /..' or '..\' patterns directed at the web interfaceAffected if Suspicious directory traversal sequences are found in web access logs
-
Check for unauthorized file access indicatorsReview system event logs and file integrity monitoring for any unexpected access to restricted directories such as /etc, /var, or configuration repositoriesAffected if Logs show access to system directories that would not result from normal administrative operations
You are affected if your FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer runs a version between 6.0.0 and 7.2.5 or between 7.4.0 and 7.4.2 and the management interface is network-accessible.
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 · scoped7.2.67.4.3
Apply Fortinet's security patches to upgrade to a supported version (7.4.3+, 7.2.6+, 7.0.13+, 6.4.15+, 6.2.13+, 6.0.13+) as specified in the Fortinet advisory, and restrict management interface access to trusted networks.
Upgrade to FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer 7.2.6 or 7.4.3 (or later stable release)
- Identify the current FortiManager or FortiAnalyzer version using the web UI or CLI (get system status)
- Determine which major version branch you are on (6.x, 7.0.x, 7.2.x, or 7.4.x)
- Backup the current configuration using 'execute backup full-config' via CLI or via web UI
- For FortiManager: If on 7.4.x branch, upgrade to version 7.4.3 or later. If on 7.2.x or earlier, upgrade to 7.2.6 or later
- For FortiAnalyzer: If on 7.4.x branch, upgrade to version 7.4.3 or later. If on 7.2.x or earlier, upgrade to 7.2.6 or later
- Download the firmware from Fortinet Customer Support portal and upload via FortiManager/FortiAnalyzer web UI (System > Firmware) or CLI (execute system firmware upgrade)
- After reboot, verify the upgrade was successful and the version is >= 7.2.6 or >= 7.4.3
- Verify the vulnerability is resolved by confirming the version and reviewing release notes
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-2024-33502 — 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-2024-33502 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