The Fortishield.sys driver in Fortinet FortiClient before 5.2.4 allows local users to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges by setti
The Fortishield.sys driver in Fortinet FortiClient before 5.2.4 allows local users to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges by setting the callback function in a (1) 0x220024 or (2) 0x220028 ioctl call.
- Published
- Sep 3, 2015
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 2.0% · 80th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-264
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
29
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 28 / 40 · 7.2 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 2.0%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| fortinet | forticlient | cpe:2.3:a:fortinet:forticlient |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- fortinet forticlientup to 5.2.3 inclusive
Same product
fortinet: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-17658An unquoted service path vulnerability in the FortiClient FortiTray component of FortiClientWindows v6.2.2 and prior allow an attacker to ga40Plan
- CVE-2017-14184An Information Disclosure vulnerability in Fortinet FortiClient for Windows 5.6.0 and below versions, FortiClient for Mac OSX 5.6.0 and belo36Monitor
- CVE-2016-8493In FortiClientWindows 5.4.1 and 5.4.2, an attacker may escalate privilege via a FortiClientNamedPipe vulnerability.36Monitor
- CVE-2024-36513A privilege context switching error vulnerability [CWE-270] in FortiClient Windows version 7.2.4 and below, version 7.0.12 and below, 6.4 al35Monitor
- CVE-2023-45590An improper control of generation of code ('code injection') in Fortinet FortiClientLinux version 7.2.0, 7.0.6 through 7.0.10 and 7.0.3 thro35Monitor
- CVE-2021-44169A improper initialization in Fortinet FortiClient (Windows) version 6.0.10 and below, version 6.2.9 and below, version 6.4.7 and below, vers35Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×3
- Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×2
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | local | 2018-08-05 |
| Exploit-DB entry | local | 2017-03-25 |
| Exploit-DB entry | local | 2017-03-25 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:2 | 2025-09-06 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:0 | 2026-09-09 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- Published
- First PoC+569 d
- TodaySep 30, 2026+4045 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- C · data can be read
- Integrity
- C · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- C · the service can be disrupted
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Confidentiality impact
- C
- Integrity impact
- C
- Availability impact
- C
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-264 · Permissions, Privileges, and Access ControlsCVSS vector
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
- fortiguard.com/advisory/mulitple-vulnerabilities-in-forticlient
- packetstormsecurity.com/files/133398/FortiClient-Antivirus-Information-Exposure-Access-Control.html
- seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2015/Sep/0
- www.coresecurity.com/advisories/forticlient-antivirus-multiple-vulnerabilities
- www.fortiguard.com/advisory/mulitple-vulnerabilities-in-forticlient
- www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/536369/100/0/threaded
- www.securitytracker.com/id/1033439
- www.exploit-db.com/exploits/41721/
- www.exploit-db.com/exploits/41722/
- www.exploit-db.com/exploits/45149/
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.