CVE-2026-39814
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 relative path traversal vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.2, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.1 through 7.4.12, FortiWeb 7.2.7 through 7.2.12, FortiWeb 7.0.10 through 7.0.12 may allow attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via <insert attack vector here>
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 relative path traversal vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb allows attackers to use '../' sequences to access files outside the web root, potentially enabling unauthorized code or command execution. The vulnerability affects multiple version branches from 7.0.10 through 8.0.2.
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>= 7.0.10, <= 7.0.12>= 7.2.0, <= 7.2.12>= 7.4.1, <= 7.4.12>= 7.6.0, < 7.6.7>= 8.0.0, < 8.0.3CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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.
-
Check FortiWeb version via CLILog into the FortiWeb CLI and run: execute system version or get system status. This displays the firmware version installed on the device.Affected if The displayed version falls within these ranges: 7.0.10-7.0.12, 7.2.0-7.2.12, 7.4.1-7.4.12, 7.6.0-7.6.6, or 8.0.0-8.0.2.
-
Check FortiWeb version via web UIAccess FortiWeb admin web UI, navigate to Dashboard -> Status or System -> Settings to view the firmware version.Affected if The version shown matches any of the affected ranges listed above.
-
Verify web UI service is enabledIn FortiWeb CLI, run: get system interface or show system interface [name] to confirm the management interface has https administrative access enabled.Affected if The web UI is accessible on a management interface and the version is in the affected range.
-
Check for WAF URL protection rulesIn FortiWeb web UI, go to Security Fabric -> Web Application Firewall -> URL Protection. Look for rules that explicitly block '../' or directory traversal patterns in HTTP requests.Affected if No such rules exist and the version is in the affected range, the system is vulnerable to traversal attacks.
If FortiWeb is running any version between 7.0.10-7.0.12, 7.2.0-7.2.12, 7.4.1-7.4.12, 7.6.0-7.6.6, or 8.0.0-8.0.2, and the web UI is accessible, the system is affected by this path traversal vulnerability.
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 · scoped7.6.78.0.3
Apply the vendor-supplied firmware updates for FortiWeb versions 7.0.x, 7.2.x, 7.4.x, 7.6.x, and 8.0.x to patch the path traversal vulnerability. If immediate patching is not possible, implement web application firewall rules to block directory traversal patterns in HTTP requests.
7.6.7 or later (7.0.x → 7.0.13+, 7.2.x → 7.2.13+, 7.4.x → 7.4.13+, 7.6.x → 7.6.7+)
- 1. Identify the current FortiWeb version by navigating to the FortiWeb GUI or running 'get system status' in CLI
- 2. Based on your current version branch, plan the upgrade: For 7.0.x branch, upgrade to 7.0.13 or later; For 7.2.x branch, upgrade to 7.2.13 or later; For 7.4.x branch, upgrade to 7.4.13 or later; For 7.6.x branch, upgrade to 7.6.7 or later
- 3. Before upgrading, back up the FortiWeb configuration using 'execute backup full-config'
- 4. Download the appropriate firmware upgrade from Fortinet Customer Support portal or FortiGuard
- 5. Upload the new firmware via FortiWeb GUI (System > Firmware > Upgrade) or CLI 'execute firmware upgrade'
- 6. After reboot, verify the upgrade was successful and configuration is intact
- 7. Confirm the new version is running with 'get system status'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-39814 — 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-2026-39814 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