Threats / Fortinet / CVE-2018-13374
CVE-2018-13374
· EUVD no mirror located
· GCVE no mirror located
Verified 2026-09-19
Fortinet FortiOS and FortiADC vulnerability
Fortinet FortiOS and FortiADC contain an improper access control flaw allowing attackers to extract LDAP server credentials by redirecting connectivity test requests to a rogue LDAP server.
Verdict
Today item, not a backlog item.
An attacker can intercept or redirect LDAP server connectivity tests to capture plaintext credentials configured in FortiGate devices, leading to unauthorized access to directory services and lateral movement within enterprise networks.
CISA KEV Yes · 2022-09-085Ransomware use Flagged5EPSS 0.37832 (verify live)6CVSS 4.33CISA SSVC Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Impact: total4
01
Is it exploitable?
— the evidence, ranked above the scoreReported exploitation
9 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2022-09-08), flagged for known ransomware use.
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.37832 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
CVSS 4.3 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N) · Affected: Fortinet, FortiOS and FortiADC. Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.CVSS — CNA-assigned (CVE.org), version 3.1, set at disclosure.
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-732 Incorrect Permission Assignment — weakness family: Authorization / access control.CWE assignment from the public NVD record (may be stale); the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
CISA SSVC (triage disposition)
Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: totalCISA's own stakeholder-specific triage inputs, published in the CVE record (CISA Coordinator role). NOTE: this is CISA's three decision points; the final Act/Attend/Track decision also requires a Mission & Well-being input not published here, so no overall decision is asserted.
Currency of the record
CISA added this to its KEV catalog 1325 days after the CVE record was published.KEV lag = CISA-KEV dateAdded − CVE.org datePublished; a floor on how long the known-exploited flaw sat in the public record before the federal catalog listed it. Severity/weakness here is CNA- or CISA-assigned (current at disclosure), independent of NVD's analysis backlog.
02
Who’s exploiting it?
— attribution turns risk into urgencyAttribution not established
No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.
03
Why it matters
— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board1
Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1
Attacker
I craft a rogue LDAP server and position it to intercept or receive a connectivity test request from a FortiGate device.
Business
Attacker gains access to LDAP credentials, enabling compromise of directory services and user authentication systems.
2
Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2
Attacker
I capture the LDAP login credentials transmitted in the test request without encryption or validation.
Business
Compromised directory credentials allow lateral movement across the enterprise and access to sensitive user and resource information.
3
Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3
Attacker
I use the extracted credentials to authenticate to the legitimate LDAP server and enumerate users and groups.
Business
Attacker establishes persistent access to identity infrastructure, increasing risk of data exfiltration and further network compromise.
04
What to do
— defensible action- Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05
Coverage & confidence
— what we know, and what we don’tEstablished (cited)
Coverage gaps — stated, not hidden
Disclosure & credit2
Catalogued by fortinetCNA
Credited with finding itNo finder is named in the public CVE record or the scanned vendor advisory — attribution scoped to the sources checked.
Found an error? Propose a correction.
A correction is a cited counter-claim — it must cite a source,
gets reviewed by a second human, and is never auto-applied. See the
correction convention and our identity
npub1j7gt9ky7sfcrjn8jjee6693dkzvk4rahs0fk2suu7968dfns62zs3mqm3y.