A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability (CWE-121) in the profile parser of FortiSandbox version 3.2.2 and below, version 3.1.4 and below may allow an authenticated attacker to potentially execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS Command vulnerability [CWE-78] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests.

A Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key vulnerability [CWE-321] in FortiSandbox may allow a privileged attacker with super-admin profile and CLI access to read sensitive data via CLI.

A client-side enforcement of server-side security vulnerability [CWE-602] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability [CWE-89] in FortiSandbox may allow a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.

An incorrect authorization vulnerability [CWE-863] in FortiSandbox may allow a low priviledged administrator to execute elevated CLI commands via the GUI console menu.

Multiple improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS Command vulnerabilities [CWE-78] in FortiSandbox may allow a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests.

Multiple Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerabilities [CWE-79] in FortiSandbox  may allow an authenticated attacker to perform cross-site scripting attack via crafted HTTP requests.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS Command vulnerability [CWE-78] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests.

CVE-2024-6387 A signal handler race condition was found in OpenSSH's server (sshd), where a client does not authenticate within LoginGraceTime seconds (120 by default, 600 in old OpenSSH versions), then sshd's SIGALRM handler is called asynchronously. However, this signal handler calls various functions that are not async-signal-safe, for example, syslog(). This could lead to remote code execution with root privileges.

An exposure of sensitive Information to an unauthorized actor vulnerability [CWE-200] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to read sensitive files via HTTP get requests.

A client-side enforcement of server-side security vulnerability [CWE-602] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to download or upload configuration.

HTTP CONTINUATION Flood can be used to launch a serious DoS attack that can cause the crash of the target server with just one attacking machine (or even one TCP connection to the target).

It works by:- initiating an HTTP stream against the target- then sending headers and CONTINUATION frames with no ENDHEADERS flag set - that creates a never ending stream that could even cause an instant crash

This works because there's many HTTP/2 implementations do not properly limit or sanitize the amount of CONTINUATION frames sent within a single stream.

CVE-2024-27316 for Apache HTTP Server (httpd):HTTP/2 incoming headers exceeding the limit are temporarily buffered in nghttp2 in order to generate an informative HTTP 413 response. If a client does not stop sending headers, this leads to memory exhaustion.

CVE-2024-24549 for Apache Tomcat:When processing an HTTP/2 request, if the request exceeded any of theconfigured limits for headers, the associated HTTP/2 stream was notreset until after all of the headers had been processed.

CVE-2024-30255 for Envoy proxy (nghttp2):Envoy's HTTP/2 codec allows the peer to send an unlimited number of CONTINUATION frames even after exceeding Envoy's header map limits. This allows an attacker to send a sequence of CONTINUATION frames without the ENDHEADERS bit set causing CPU utilization, consuming approximately 1 core per 300Mbit/s of traffic.

CVE-2023-45288 for Golang:An attacker may cause an HTTP/2 endpoint to read arbitrary amounts of header data by sending an excessive number of CONTINUATION frames. Maintaining HPACK state requires parsing and processing all HEADERS and CONTINUATION frames on a connection. When a request's headers exceed MaxHeaderBytes, no memory is allocated to store the excess headers, but they are still parsed. This permits an attacker to cause an HTTP/2 endpoint to read arbitrary amounts of header data, all associated with a request which is going to be rejected. These headers can include Huffman-encoded data which is significantly more expensive for the receiver to decode than for an attacker to send.

CVE-2024-28182 for nghttp2:nghttp2 library keeps reading the unbounded number of HTTP/2 CONTINUATION frames even after a stream is reset to keep HPACK context in sync. This causes excessive CPU usage to decode HPACK stream.

CVE-2024-27983 for Node.js:An attacker can make the Node.js HTTP/2 server completely unavailable by sending a small amount of HTTP/2 frames packets with a few HTTP/2 frames inside. It is possible to leave some data in nghttp2 memory after reset when headers with HTTP/2 CONTINUATION frame are sent to the server and then a TCP connection is abruptly closed by the client triggering the Http2Session destructor while header frames are still being processed (and stored in memory) causing a race condition.

CVE-2024-3302 for Firefox:There was no limit to the number of HTTP/2 CONTINUATION frames that would be processed. A server could abuse this to create an Out of Memory condition in the browser.

An improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability [CWE-22] in FortiSandbox may allow a privileged attacker with super-admin profile and CLI access to execute arbitrary code via CLI.

An improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability |CWE-22] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to read arbitrary files via crafted http requests.

An improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability [CWE-22] in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with at least read-only permission to delete arbitrary files via crafted HTTP requests.

An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiManager 7.0.1 and below, 6.4.6 and below; FortiAnalyzer 7.0.2 and below, 6.4.7 and below; FortiOS 6.2.x and 6.0.x; FortiSandbox 4.0.x, 3.2.x and 3.1.x may allow a network adjacent and unauthenticated attacker to man-in-the-middle the communication between the listed products and some external peers.

A improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection') vulnerability [CWE-89] in Fortinet FortiSandbox version 4.2.0, 4.0.0 through 4.0.2, 3.2.0 through 3.2.3, 3.1.x and 3.0.x allows a remote and authenticated attacker with read permission to retrieve arbitrary files from the underlying Linux system via a crafted HTTP request.

A improper privilege management in Fortinet FortiSandbox version 4.2.0 through 4.2.2, 4.0.0 through 4.0.2 and before 3.2.3 and FortiDeceptor version 4.1.0, 4.0.0 through 4.0.2 and before 3.3.3 allows a remote authenticated attacker to perform unauthorized API calls via crafted HTTP or HTTPS requests.

A use of password hash with insufficient computational effort vulnerability [CWE-916] in FortiSandbox before 4.2.0 may allow an attacker with access to the password database to efficiently mount bulk guessing attacks to recover the passwords.

An insufficient logging [CWE-778] vulnerability in FortiSandbox versions 4.0.0 to 4.0.2, 3.2.0 to 3.2.3 and 3.1.0 to 3.1.5 and FortiDeceptor versions 4.2.0, 4.1.0 through 4.1.1, 4.0.0 through 4.0.2, 3.3.0 through 3.3.3, 3.2.0 through 3.2.2,3.1.0 through 3.1.1 and 3.0.0 through 3.0.2 may allow a remote attacker to repeatedly enter incorrect credentials without causing a log entry, and with no limit on the number of failed authentication attempts.

A missing cryptographic steps vulnerability in the function that encrypts users' LDAP and RADIUS credentials in FortiSandbox before 4.0.1, FortiWeb before 6.3.12, FortiADC before 6.2.1, FortiMail 7.0.1 and earlier may allow an attacker in possession of the password store to compromise the confidentiality of the encrypted secrets.

An insufficient session expiration vulnerability [CWE-613] in FortiSandbox may allow an attacker to reuse the unexpired admin user session IDs to gain information about other users configured on the device, should the attacker be able to obtain that session ID (via other, hypothetical attacks)

An improper input validation vulnerability in the sniffer interface of FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker to silently halt the sniffer via specifically crafted requests.

An insufficient session expiration vulnerability [CWE-613] in FortiSandbox may allow an attacker to reuse the unexpired admin user session IDs to gain information about other users configured on the device, should the attacker be able to obtain that session ID (via other, hypothetical attacks)

An improper input validation vulnerability in the sniffer interface of FortiSandbox before 3.2.2 may allow an authenticated attacker to silently halt the sniffer via specifically crafted requests.

Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerabilities in FortiSandbox 3.2.0 through 3.2.2, and 3.1.0 through 3.1.4 may allow an authenticated user to obtain unauthorized access to files and data via specifially crafted web requests.

Multiple instances of improper neutralization of input during web page generation vulnerabilities in FortiSandbox may allow an unauthenticated attacker to perform an XSS attack via specifically crafted request parameters.

An uncontrolled resource consumption (denial of service) vulnerability in FortiSandbox and FortiAuthenticator login modules may allow an unauthenticated attacker to bring the device into an unresponsive state via specifically-crafted long request parameters.

An improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS Command vulnerability in FortiSandbox may allow an authenticated attacker with access to the web GUI to execute unauthorized code or commands via specifically crafted HTTP requests.