Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2020-9294 is a critical-severity Improper Authentication (CWE-287) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortimail. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, ranked in the top 0.5% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2020-30120
Vulnerability Data
An improper authentication vulnerability in FortiMail 5.4.10, 6.0.7, 6.2.2 and earlier and FortiVoiceEntreprise 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to access the system as a legitimate user by requesting a password change via the user interface.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI
Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 8 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V6.4.4V6.5.4V6.5.5V6.5.7
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Detects unauthorized successful logons resulting from improper authentication implementations.
Documented procedures ensure personnel are trained on authentication mechanisms, tangibly lowering the risk of improper authentication being exploited.
Security awareness training instructs users on secure authentication practices and avoiding credential compromise.
Training on authentication mechanisms and best practices decreases the occurrence of improper authentication.
Non-repudiation requires strong authentication mechanisms to irrefutably attribute performed actions to specific individuals or processes.
Session content review can reveal authentication bypasses or failures in session establishment.
Review of authentication-related audit records can detect improper authentication mechanisms or bypasses.
Assessments check authentication mechanisms for correct implementation and effectiveness, reducing successful authentication bypass attempts.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.AA-03 directly enforces authentication mechanisms that eliminate most improper-authentication defects, yet CWE-287 spans additional vectors (missing checks, flawed protocols, session handling) that one control does not fully close.
PR.AA-04 directly enables verification of identity assertions (mostly preventing CWE-287 in that scope) yet leaves many other authentication failure modes unaddressed (only partial prevention overall).
PR.AA-01 supplies and governs credentials/tokens that authentication relies on, removing some weak-credential cases, yet leaves verification logic, missing checks, and protocol flaws untouched.
PR.AA-02 ensures valid enrollment and unique credential binding, which reduces some improper-auth risks at issuance time but leaves runtime claim verification untouched, so each direction only partially addresses the other.
PR.PS-01 can enforce auth-related settings via hardened baselines and default reviews, blocking some config-based instances of CWE-287, yet leaves code-level auth flaws untouched so neither direction reaches mostly.
Patching/maintenance can remediate some known auth vulnerabilities after deployment (partial forward) but does not address the design or implementation of authentication logic itself (none reverse).
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Requiring authentication methods whose strength matches the sensitivity of the data and mandating multi-factor authentication directly blocks attempts to access resources without proving identity.
Verifying user identity before issuing replacement credentials and forcing changes after compromise reduces the likelihood that authentication bypass can be achieved through stolen or weak credentials.
Mandating segregated approval and oversight for non-human identities reduces the chance that weak or orphaned credentials can be exploited for unauthorized authentication.
Requiring authentication mechanisms and technical parameters for secure connections ensures that network services verify user identity before granting access, preventing exploitation of missing or weak authentication.
Security requirements specified early and verified through testing drive the consistent implementation of authentication mechanisms, decreasing the likelihood that authentication steps are omitted or incorrectly applied.
Defining the required level of trust in entity identity and the authentication mechanisms to achieve it ensures that authentication is explicitly addressed rather than omitted.