FortipamOperating system · Fortinet
CVE-2025-49201
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 · uneditedA weak authentication vulnerability in Fortinet FortiPAM 1.5.0, FortiPAM 1.4.0 through 1.4.2, FortiPAM 1.3 all versions, FortiPAM 1.2 all versions, FortiPAM 1.1 all versions, FortiPAM 1.0 all versions, FortiSwitchManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.4 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted http 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 · moderate confidenceA weak authentication vulnerability in Fortinet FortiPAM and FortiSwitchManager allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code or commands by sending specially crafted HTTP requests. The vulnerability stems from insufficient authentication controls that can be bypassed or exploited through malformed requests.
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
FortipamOperating system
>= 1.0.0, < 1.4.3= 1.5.0
FortiswitchmanagerApplication
>= 7.2.0, < 7.2.5CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 FortiPAM versionRun 'get system status' or check the FortiPAM management GUI dashboard to view the current firmware versionAffected if Version is >= 1.0.0 and < 1.4.3, or equals 1.5.0
-
Identify FortiSwitchManager versionRun 'get system status' or check the FortiSwitchManager management GUI dashboard to view the current firmware versionAffected if Version is >= 7.2.0 and < 7.2.5
-
Assess management interface exposureReview network configuration to determine if FortiPAM or FortiSwitchManager management interfaces are reachable from untrusted networks or the internetAffected if Management interface is directly accessible from the internet or untrusted networks without VPN or IP restrictions
-
Check for authentication bypass indicatorsReview access logs for unusual HTTP requests that may indicate authentication bypass attempts, particularly requests with unexpected headers or malformed authentication tokensAffected if Suspicious authentication bypass attempts are observed in logs or unauthorized commands have been executed
You are affected if you run FortiPAM version 1.0.0 through 1.4.3 or 1.5.0, or FortiSwitchManager version 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, and your management interface is accessible to potential attackers.
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 · scoped1.4.37.2.5
Apply vendor-supplied patches or upgrade to FortiPAM 1.5.1 or later and FortiSwitchManager 7.2.5 or later. Restrict administrative interface access to trusted networks until patches are applied.
FortiPAM: upgrade to 1.4.3 or 1.5.1 (or later); FortiSwitchManager: upgrade to 7.2.5 (or later)
- 1. Identify the deployed Fortinet product (FortiPAM or FortiSwitchManager) and current version using the admin console or CLI
- 2. For FortiPAM: If running version 1.0.x through 1.4.2, upgrade to version 1.4.3 or later; if running version 1.5.0, upgrade to version 1.5.1 or later
- 3. For FortiSwitchManager: If running version 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, upgrade to version 7.2.5 or later
- 4. Download the appropriate firmware from the Fortinet support portal (fortinet.com/support)
- 5. Upload and install the firmware upgrade via the FortiPAM or FortiSwitchManager admin interface
- 6. After upgrade, verify the new version is installed and test that the service functions normally
- 7. Review audit logs for any signs of exploitation attempts prior to patching
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Fortipam
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49201 — 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-2025-49201 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