CVE-2026-59837
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 stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.1, FortiOS 7.2 all versions, FortiPAM 1.8.0 through 1.8.2, FortiPAM 1.7 all versions, FortiPAM 1.6 all versions, FortiPAM 1.5 all versions, FortiPAM 1.4 all versions, FortiPAM 1.3 all versions, FortiPAM 1.2 all versions, FortiPAM 1.1 all versions, FortiPAM 1.0 all versions, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.13, FortiProxy 7.2 all versions may allow a privileged authenticated attacker who can bypass stack protection and ASLR to execute arbitrary code or commands via 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 stack-based buffer overflow in Fortinet FortiOS, FortiPAM, and FortiProxy allows a privileged authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code via crafted HTTP requests, but only after bypassing stack protection (canaries) and ASLR security mechanisms.
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>= 7.2.0, < 7.4.14>= 7.2.0, < 7.4.2>= 1.0.0, < 1.8.3CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 the Fortinet product running in your environmentAccess the device CLI or web UI and run the command: get system status (CLI) or check System > FortiView > Dashboard in the web UI to see the product name and modelAffected if The device is not FortiOS, FortiPAM, or FortiProxy (the CVE does not apply)
-
Determine the installed firmware versionRun: get system status in the Fortinet CLI. The output will display the Firmware Version (for FortiOS), FortiPAM Version, or FortiProxy VersionAffected if The version falls within these ranges: FortiOS >= 7.2.0 and < 7.4.2, FortiPAM >= 1.0.0 and < 1.8.3, FortiProxy >= 7.2.0 and < 7.4.14
-
Verify if HTTP/HTTPS administrative interface is exposed externallyReview your network firewall rules and Fortinet firewall policy settings to confirm whether ports 80/443 or the management interface (port1 by default) are accessible from untrusted networks or the internetAffected if The management interface is reachable from untrusted IP addresses (the vulnerability requires a network-accessible authenticated attacker)
-
Confirm the attacker would need privileged authenticationReview admin user accounts and their privilege level in FortiOS/FortiPAM/FortiProxy via: get admin user (CLI) or check System > Admin > Administrators in the web UIAffected if Any privileged admin account exists on the system (the CVE requires an authenticated attacker with privileges to send the crafted HTTP requests)
You are affected if you run FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.4.1, FortiPAM 1.0.0 through 1.8.2, or FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.4.13, and your management interface is accessible to an attacker who has obtained privileged admin credentials.
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 · scoped1.8.37.4.27.4.14
Apply vendor-supplied firmware patches for FortiOS, FortiPAM, and FortiProxy; restrict administrative access to trusted IPs only; monitor for indicators of compromise and anomalous HTTP traffic patterns.
FortiOS >= 7.4.2, FortiProxy >= 7.4.14, FortiPAM >= 1.8.3
- For FortiOS: Upgrade to version 7.4.2 or later
- For FortiProxy: Upgrade to version 7.4.14 or later
- For FortiPAM: Upgrade to version 1.8.3 or later
- After upgrading, verify the new version is running with 'get system status' command
- Confirm the vulnerability is resolved by reviewing FortiGuard release notes for the installed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-59837 — 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-2026-59837 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