Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-46215

Fortinet Fortisandbox 4.0.0 – 4.4.8

Published
18 November 2025
Modified
20 November 2025
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0031 23th percentile
Risk Priority 43 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-46215 is a medium-severity Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization (CWE-653) vulnerability in Fortinet Fortisandbox. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Escape to Host (T1611); ranked at the 23th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-2 (Separation of System and User Functionality) and SC-3 (Security Function Isolation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A06:2025 Insecure Design

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

An Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization vulnerability [CWE-653] in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.1, FortiSandbox 4.4.0 through 4.4.7, FortiSandbox 4.2 all versions, FortiSandbox 4.0 all versions may allow an unauthenticated attacker to evade the sandboxing scan via a crafted file.

CWE(s)
CWE-653

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1611 Escape to Host Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may break out of a container or virtualized environment to gain access to the underlying host.
attack.mitre.org →
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1134 Access Token Manipulation Stealth
Adversaries may modify access tokens to operate under a different user or system security context to perform actions and bypass access controls.
attack.mitre.org →
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
attack.mitre.org →
T1548.001 Setuid and Setgid Privilege Escalation
An adversary may abuse configurations where an application has the setuid or setgid bits set in order to get code running in a different (and possibly more privileged) user’s context.
attack.mitre.org →
T1055 Process Injection Stealth
Adversaries may inject code into processes in order to evade process-based defenses as well as possibly elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-45328Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2024-31491Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2024-23671Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2025-52436Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2023-47541Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2025-53949Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2026-39808Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2024-27781Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2023-41680Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox
CVE-2023-45587Same product: Fortinet Fortisandbox

Affected Assets

fortinet
fortisandbox
4.0.0 — 4.4.8 · 5.0.0 — 5.0.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 8 hardening rules · 7 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

—

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SC-3 Security Function Isolation good match

Security function isolation is the canonical mechanism for protecting higher-privilege compartments.

SC-39 Process Isolation good match

Process isolation maintains separate execution domains so one process cannot affect another’s privilege level.

SC-2 Separation of System and User Functionality good match

Explicit separation of user and management functionality implements the required compartmentalization.

SC-32 System Partitioning good match

System partitioning creates distinct domains that enforce isolation between differently privileged components.

AC-3 Access Enforcement partial match

Access enforcement directly requires approved authorizations to be applied to compartmentalized resources.

AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement partial match

Information flow enforcement structurally prevents unauthorized mixing of data or functions across privilege boundaries.

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-05 full match
prevents

Least-privilege policy directly enforces separation of privilege levels and access rights.

PR.IR-01 mostly match
prevents

Network and environment segmentation implements the isolation required to prevent unauthorized cross-compartment access.

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.5.3 Segregation of duties mostly match
degrades

Segregation of duties directly enforces separation of privilege levels and functions.

A.8.22 Segregation of networks mostly match
prevents

Network segregation is a classic technical control for isolating different privilege domains.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles mostly match
prevents

Secure system architecture principles explicitly call for isolation and least-privilege boundaries.

A.8.31 Separation of development, test and production environments mostly match
prevents

Separation of development, test and production environments is a direct application of compartmentalization.

A.5.15 Access control partial match
degrades

Access control policies establish the boundaries that isolation must enforce.

A.5.18 Access rights partial match
degrades

Managing access rights is the operational mechanism for compartmentalizing privileges.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
  • V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-653
  • V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-653
Windows 10 (1 rule)
  • V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653
Windows 11 (1 rule)
  • V-253269 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
  • V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-653

References