Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-48788 is a critical-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Fortinet Forticlient Enterprise Management Server. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Protocol or Service Impersonation (T1001.003); ranked in the top 0.1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2023-48788 is an SQL injection vulnerability (CWE-89) present in Fortinet FortiClientEMS versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.2 and 7.0.1 through 7.0.10. The flaw stems from improper neutralization of special elements in SQL commands and can be triggered by specially crafted packets, enabling execution of unauthorized code or commands. It carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8 reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, and no required privileges or user interaction.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can send malicious packets to an affected FortiClientEMS instance and obtain full control over the underlying database and host, potentially leading to data exfiltration, privilege escalation, or further lateral movement within the management environment.
The Fortinet advisory FG-IR-24-007 recommends applying the vendor-supplied patches or mitigations for the listed FortiClientEMS releases. The vulnerability is also tracked in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, confirming observed in-the-wild exploitation.
EPSS scores have remained consistently high, with a peak of 0.9679 and current value of 0.9408, indicating sustained exploitation interest following disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-52821
Vulnerability Data
A improper neutralization of special elements used in an sql command ('sql injection') in Fortinet FortiClientEMS version 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, FortiClientEMS 7.0.1 through 7.0.10 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via specially crafted packets.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 25 March 2024
Related Threats
Threat-Actor AttributionAI
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
A.5.6 only improves knowledge flow, awareness of threats/patches and access to specialist advice; it does not stop SQL injection from being exploitable in code that still contains the flaw.