Fortinet fortisandbox, OS command injection: 12 records, one defect family
Fortinet fortisandbox has been reported 12 separate times for the same kind of mistake, CWE-78, between 2021-07-20 and 2026-06-09. A defect family is our own grouping of the CVE corpus: every record naming one product and one weakness class, collected so a repeat is visible as a repeat. No public source publishes this, and what this page counts is how often this one product has gone wrong in this one way.
What this page is, and what it is not
The records are public. This grouping is not. No source publishes defect families, so we built them: every record in the corpus sorted by the product an authority named and the weakness class carried with it, 21316 families over 105586 records. This one holds every record that names Fortinet fortisandbox and carries CWE-78, matched character for character. We show the join because a grouping you cannot check is a grouping you should not cite.
One record is an incident. 12 filings, between 2021-07-20 and 2026-06-09, all landing on the same weakness class in the same product, is a habit in what gets reported here, and a habit is something you can plan around. This is what we held on 2026-09-20.
A repeat is evidence about where to look. If you are reviewing Fortinet fortisandbox, the records below say which mistake has already been found more than once, which is the cheapest place a reviewer can start. If you are asking the vendor a question, a count under one weakness class is a better question than any single record is.
What this page cannot tell you is decided by what was joined. A product name and a weakness class settled membership, so those two values are the whole of what the page asserts. Records here may sit in the same line of code or in unrelated parts of the product, and we hold no value that separates those cases. A fixed version named in one record closes that record and says nothing about the others. And nothing here describes anyone's systems, because no value in this family connects a product name to an installation.
The names the authorities used
One spelling, used by every authority that filed one of these records: fortinet fortisandbox.
Family membership: held values. Joined on the product and weakness class the assigning authorities wrote, with no model involved.
What the records offer
No record in this family publishes a fixed version in held sources.
2 records are listed by CISA with a required action, which carries a federal remediation deadline on its own page.
The earliest was published 2021-07-20 and the latest 2026-06-09. That span is how long this product kept producing this weakness, not how long any one record took to fix.
What this family was researched, not held
FortiSandbox command injection, 2021 to 2026, needing less access each time
FortiSandbox has produced operating system command injection records steadily from 2021 to 2026, all under the same weakness class. The early ones needed a privileged account: CVE-2021-22125, published 20 July 2021, sat in the sniffer module and reached the shell only for an authenticated administrator able to alter a configuration file. By CVE-2024-27778, published 14 January 2025, an authenticated user holding read-only permission was enough. In 2026 two of them no longer needed an account at all, and CISA added CVE-2026-25089 and CVE-2026-39808 to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on 16 July 2026. Fortinet shipped fixes for those two in April and June 2026, has not publicly confirmed exploitation, and CrowdSec reported the first in-the-wild attempts against CVE-2026-39808 on 17 June 2026 through the tracer-behavior endpoint.
The direction of travel across this group is toward less required access, from administrator, to read-only, to none. If you run FortiSandbox, the management and API surfaces are the part worth restricting, and each record needs checking against your own version rather than against the group.
This note establishes only that these records read alike: one product family, one weakness class, over five years. It does not say they share a root cause or an estate, and it does not say that fixing one of them addresses any of the others.
Written from cveawg.mitre.org, cveawg.mitre.org, cveawg.mitre.org, arcticwolf.com, crowdsec.net, cisa.gov, theregister.com, fieldeffect.com. Stated at high confidence. Nothing in this box is a value the index holds, and none of it opens a receipt.
What this page does not cover
This is a family of records that read alike. It is not a shared vulnerability, not an inventory, and not a statement that one fix closes the rest. Each record's own state, its own dates and its own receipts are on its own page.
Grouped by shared product and weakness, not by shared vulnerability. Each record's own state is on its own page.
Everything this vendor has, including records outside this family:
12 records, read from the index as it stood on 20 Sep 2026. Every row opens the record it names, and every value on that record opens its own receipt.