Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-46662 is a high-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortimanager. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 19% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV 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-2024-46662 is a command injection vulnerability (CWE-77), resulting from improper neutralization of special elements used in a command, affecting Fortinet FortiManager versions 7.4.1 through 7.4.3 and FortiManager Cloud versions 7.4.1 through 7.4.3. The issue, published on 2025-03-14T15:15:43.200, carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and enables privilege escalation via specifically crafted packets.
An attacker requires low privileges (PR:L) to exploit this vulnerability over the network (AV:N) with low attack complexity (AC:L) and no user interaction (UI:N). Successful exploitation allows the attacker to achieve high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C:I:A:H), specifically through privilege escalation.
The Fortinet advisory FG-IR-24-222 at https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-222 provides details on mitigation and patching recommendations for affected versions.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-54072
Vulnerability Data
A improper neutralization of special elements used in a command ('command injection') in Fortinet FortiManager versions 7.4.1 through 7.4.3, FortiManager Cloud versions 7.4.1 through 7.4.3 allows attacker to escalation of privilege via specifically crafted packets
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8V1.2.9
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.