Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-54018 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortisandbox. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 5% 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-2024-54018 consists of multiple improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command vulnerabilities (CWE-78) in FortiSandbox versions before 4.4.5. These flaws allow a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests, stemming from inadequate sanitization of inputs that are passed to underlying operating system commands.
The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.2 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating it is exploitable over the network with low attack complexity, but requires high privileges. A suitably privileged attacker, such as an administrator with access to the system, can craft malicious requests to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands, potentially achieving high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, including full system compromise.
Fortinet's PSIRT advisory (FG-IR-24-110) details the vulnerabilities and recommends upgrading to FortiSandbox 4.4.5 or later to mitigate the issues, as all prior versions are affected.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-54249
Vulnerability Data
Multiple improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS Command vulnerabilities [CWE-78] in FortiSandbox before 4.4.5 allows a privileged attacker to execute unauthorized commands via crafted requests.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
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.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (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.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.