CVE-2025-52970
The record is as the index held it on 2026-10-03. The KEV listing and the EPSS score were read on 2026-10-18, and a value that moved since the build is dated to that read. Changes between those two dates are not all shown.
No source can show you its own past. This one can.
Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.
A improper handling of parameters in Fortinet FortiWeb versions 7.6.3 and below, versions 7.4.7 and below, versions 7.2.10 and below, and 7.0.10 and…
rank 44 = 17 + 19 + 3 + 5 + 0
rank@v1 · scheduled
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.10084 · without this subject the record ranks 27
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 7.7, from the CNA · without this subject the record ranks 25
It is getting worse, not staying still
FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed
rose on 2025-12-19 · without this subject the record ranks 41
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
4 products in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 39
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 44
Hindsight · the state
Foresight · where to check next
No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.
Running Fortinet FortiWeb? Check your version
A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.
Watch this record
Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.
Set up a watchlist (free with an account: one stack of three products)
Record your call
Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.
Or open an investigation: an incident or a near miss on this CVE, kept with its evidence where anyone in your organisation can find it.
Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.
Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.
Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness
Written for the ticket you're about to file.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
Show full BOD 26-04 deadline
CISA has not scored it, so the directive's own defaults apply: automatable no, technical impact total. Calendar days from the KEV listing or from when you find it on a system, whichever is first. Federal agencies are bound from 7 Dec 2026, and contracts often carry it to suppliers. The directive and its table
Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score
Current rung: Proof-of-concept published · 2 public repositories, 2025-08-23.
- RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
- RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published · 2 public repositories2025-08-23receipt
- RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
- RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known
A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.
$503,000 = $4.99M incident cost x 1 exposure x 0.10084 likelihood
udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run
$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.
Attack path
What it is stated by the CNA
A improper handling of parameters in Fortinet FortiWeb versions 7.6.3 and below, versions 7.4.7 and below, versions 7.2.10 and below, and 7.0.10 and below may allow an unauthenticated remote attacker with non-public information pertaining to the device and targeted user to gain admin privileges on the device via a specially crafted request. receipt
NVD's analysis a second authority
- weakness
- CWE-233
- affected versions
- fortinet fortiweb >= 7.0.0 < 7.0.11; fortinet fortiweb >= 7.2.0 < 7.2.11; fortinet fortiweb >= 7.4.0 < 7.4.8; and 1 more, listed in full below
- also scored by
- psirt@fortinet.com 8.1 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
check it yourself fortiguard.fortinet.com receipt
Dated events
Movement the material steps
This score more than doubled inside 72 hours. Both observations are in the full history below.
Show all 28 observations
28 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt
The full biography
Exploit probability more than doubled between 2025-08-13 and 2025-08-16 (0.00093 → 0.00245) and the record had been public for 1 year, 2 months when this index was last written.
No material movement in 21 days as of the last ingest this index recorded.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2025-52970.
What usually comes next
Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.