Dynacolor FCM-MB40 v1.2.0.0 devices have a hard-coded SSL/TLS key that is used during an administrator's SSL conversation.

A use of password hash with insufficient computational effort vulnerability [CWE-916] in FortiSandbox before 4.2.0 may allow an attacker with access to the password database to efficiently mount bulk guessing attacks to recover the passwords.

An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiADC 7.4.0, 7.2 all versions, 7.1 all versions, 7.0 all versions may allow a remote and unauthenticated attacker to perform a Man-in-the-Middle attack on the communication channel between the device and public SDN connectors.

A server-generated error message containing sensitive information in Fortinet FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.3, 6.4.0 through 6.4.8, 6.2.x, 6.0.x and FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.1, 2.0.x allows malicious webservers to retrieve a web proxy's client username and IP via same origin HTTP requests triggering proxy-generated HTTP status codes pages.

A exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor in Fortinet FortiAuthenticator version 6.4.0, version 6.3.2 and below, version 6.2.1 and below, version 6.1.2 and below, version 6.0.7 to 6.0.1 allows attacker to duplicate a target LDAP user 2 factors authentication token via crafted HTTP requests.

An improper validation of certificate with host mismatch [CWE-297] vulnerability in FortiOS versions 6.4.6 and below may allow the connection to a malicious LDAP server via options in GUI, leading to disclosure of sensitive information, such as AD credentials.

Multiple padding oracle vulnerabilities (Zombie POODLE, GOLDENDOODLE, OpenSSL 0-length) in the CBC padding implementation of FortiOS IPS engine version 5.000 to 5.006, 4.000 to 4.036, 4.200 to 4.219, 3.547 and below, when configured with SSL Deep Inspection policies and with the IPS sensor enabled, may allow an attacker to decipher TLS connections going through the FortiGate via monitoring the traffic in a Man-in-the-middle position.

The implementation of an ANSI X9.31 RNG in Fortinet FortiGate allows attackers to gain unauthorized read access to data handled by the device via IPSec/TLS decryption.

A cleartext transmission of sensitive information vulnerability in Fortinet FortiManager 5.2.0 through 5.2.7, 5.4.0 and 5.4.1 may allow an unauthenticated attacker in a man in the middle position to retrieve the admin password via intercepting REST API JSON responses.

An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiClientWindows 6.4 all versions, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, FortiClientMac 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientLinux 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 through 7.2.4, FortiClientAndroid 6.4 all versions, 7.0 all versions, 7.2.0 and FortiClientiOS 5.6 all versions, 6.0.0 through 6.0.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.6 SAML SSO feature may allow an unauthenticated attacker to man-in-the-middle the communication between the FortiClient and  both the service provider and the identity provider.

A missing cryptographic step in the Identity-Based Encryption service of FortiMail before 7.0.0 may allow an unauthenticated attacker who intercepts the encrypted messages to manipulate them in such a way that makes the tampering and the recovery of the plaintexts possible.

A plaintext recovery of encrypted messages or a Man-in-the-middle (MiTM) attack on RSA PKCS #1 v1.5 encryption may be possible without knowledge of the server's private key. Fortinet FortiOS 5.4.6 to 5.4.9, 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 are vulnerable by such attack under VIP SSL feature when CPx being used.

An information disclosure vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 6.0.0 and below versions reveals user's web portal login credentials in a Javascript file sent to client-side when pages bookmarked in web portal use the Single Sign-On feature.

A plaintext recovery of encrypted messages or a Man-in-the-middle (MiTM) attack on RSA PKCS #1 v1.5 encryption may be possible without knowledge of the server's private key. Fortinet FortiOS 5.4.6 to 5.4.9, 6.0.0 and 6.0.1 are vulnerable by such attack under SSL Deep Inspection feature when CPx being used.

Use of a hard-coded cryptographic key to encrypt password data in CLI configuration in FortiManager 6.2.3 and below, FortiAnalyzer 6.2.3 and below may allow an attacker with access to the CLI configuration or the CLI backup file to decrypt the sensitive data, via knowledge of the hard-coded key.

A improper authentication vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSIEM before 6.5.0 allows a local attacker with CLI access to perform operations on the Glassfish server directly via a hardcoded password.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability [CWE-321] in FortiDDoS API 5.5.0 through 5.5.1, 5.4.0 through 5.4.2, 5.3.0 through 5.3.1, 5.2.0, 5.1.0 may allow an attacker who managed to retrieve the key from one device to sign JWT tokens for any device.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability [CWE-321] in FortiEDR versions 5.0.2, 5.0.1, 5.0.0, 4.0.0 may allow an unauthenticated attacker on the network to disguise as and forge messages from other collectors.

A hard-coded account named 'upgrade' in Fortinet FortiWLM 8.3.0 and lower versions allows a remote attacker to log-in and execute commands with 'upgrade' account privileges.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability [CWE-321] in the registration mechanism of FortiEDR collectors versions 5.0.2, 5.0.1, 5.0.0, 4.0.0 may allow a local attacker to disable and uninstall the collectors from the end-points within the same deployment.

The presence of a hardcoded account in Fortinet FortiWLC 8.3.3 allows attackers to gain unauthorized read/write access via a remote shell.

The presence of a hardcoded account in Fortinet FortiWLC 7.0.11 and earlier allows attackers to gain unauthorized read/write access via a remote shell.

A combination of a use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability [CWE-321] in FortiClientEMS 7.0.1 and below, 6.4.6 and below and an improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-297] in FortiClientWindows, FortiClientLinux and FortiClientMac 7.0.1 and below, 6.4.6 and below may allow an unauthenticated and network adjacent attacker to perform a man-in-the-middle attack between the EMS and the FCT via the telemetry protocol.

A use of hard-coded credentials vulnerability [CWE-798] in FortiTester 2.3.0 through 7.2.3 may allow an attacker who managed to get a shell on the device to access the database via shell commands.

A use of hard-coded credentials vulnerability in Fortinet FortiAnalyzer and FortiManager 7.0.0 - 7.0.8, 7.2.0 - 7.2.3 and 7.4.0 allows an attacker to access Fortinet private testing data via the use of static credentials.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key in Fortinet FortiSwitch version 7.4.0 and 7.2.0 through 7.2.5 and 7.0.0 through 7.0.7 and 6.4.0 through 6.4.13 and 6.2.0 through 6.2.7 and 6.0.0 through 6.0.7 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via crafted requests.

A use of hard-coded credentials vulnerability in Fortinet FortiClient Windows 7.0.0 - 7.0.9 and 7.2.0 - 7.2.1 allows an attacker to bypass system protections via the use of static credentials.

A use of hard-coded credentials vulnerability [CWE-798] in FortiNAC-F version 7.2.0, FortiNAC version 9.4.2 and below, 9.2 all versions, 9.1 all versions, 8.8 all versions, 8.7 all versions may allow an authenticated attacker to access to the database via shell commands.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability in FortiSIEM version 5.2.6 may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to obtain SSH access to the supervisor as the restricted user "tunneluser" by leveraging knowledge of the private key from another installation or a firmware image.

The presence of a hardcoded account named 'core' in Fortinet FortiWLC allows attackers to gain unauthorized read/write access via a remote shell.

Use of Hard-coded Credentials vulnerability in FortiRecorder all versions below 2.7.4 may allow an unauthenticated attacker with knowledge of the aforementioned credentials and network access to FortiCameras to take control of those, provided they are managed by a FortiRecorder device.

Use of a hard-coded cryptographic key to cipher sensitive data in FortiOS configuration backup file may allow an attacker with access to the backup file to decipher the sensitive data, via knowledge of the hard-coded key. The aforementioned sensitive data includes users' passwords (except the administrator's password), private keys' passphrases and High Availability password (when set).

Use of a hard-coded cryptographic key to encrypt security sensitive data in local storage and configuration in FortiClient for Windows prior to 6.4.0 may allow an attacker with access to the local storage or the configuration backup file to decrypt the sensitive data via knowledge of the hard-coded key.

A hard-coded password vulnerability in the Fortinet FortiSIEM database component version 5.2.5 and below may allow attackers to access the device database via the use of static credentials.

The rsyncd server in Fortinet FortiWLC 6.1-2-29 and earlier, 7.0-9-1, 7.0-10-0, 8.0-5-0, 8.1-2-0, and 8.2-4-0 has a hardcoded rsync account, which allows remote attackers to read or write to arbitrary files via unspecified vectors.

A use of hard-coded credentials (CWE-798) vulnerability in FortiPortal versions 5.2.5 and below, 5.3.5 and below, 6.0.4 and below, versions 5.1.x and 5.0.x may allow a remote and unauthenticated attacker to execute unauthorized commands as root by uploading and deploying malicious web application archive files using the default hard-coded Tomcat Manager username and password.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key vulnerability in the SSLVPN of FortiOS before 7.0.1 may allow an attacker to retrieve the key by reverse engineering.

Usage of hard-coded cryptographic keys to encrypt configuration files and debug logs in FortiAuthenticator versions before 6.3.0 may allow an attacker with access to the files or the CLI configuration to decrypt the sensitive data, via knowledge of the hard-coded key.

A use of hard-coded cryptographic key in Fortinet FortiClientWindows version 7.4.0, 7.2.x all versions, 7.0.x all versions, and 6.4.x all versions may allow a low-privileged user to decrypt interprocess communication via monitoring named piped.

A flaw was found in Keycloak. This issue occurs because sensitive runtime values, such as passwords, may be captured during the Keycloak build process and embedded as default values in bytecode, leading to unintended information disclosure. In Keycloak 26, sensitive data specified directly in environment variables during the build process is also stored as a default values, making it accessible during runtime. Indirect usage of environment variables for SPI options and Quarkus properties is also vulnerable due to unconditional expansion by PropertyMapper logic, capturing sensitive data as default values in all Keycloak versions up to 26.0.2.

Amcrest networked devices use the same hardcoded SSL private key across different customers' installations, which allows remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms by leveraging knowledge of this key from another installation, as demonstrated by Amcrest_IPC-HX1X3X-LEXUS_Eng_N_AMCREST_V2.420.AC01.3.R.20180206.

The Norton Identity Safe product prior to 5.3.0.976 may be susceptible to a privilege escalation issue via a hard coded IV, which is a type of vulnerability that can potentially increase the likelihood of encrypted data being recovered without adequate credentials.

Foscam networked devices use the same hardcoded SSL private key across different customers' installations, which allows remote attackers to defeat cryptographic protection mechanisms by leveraging knowledge of this key from another installation.

Zyxel CloudCNM SecuManager 3.1.0 and 3.1.1 has a hardcoded DSA SSH key for the root account.

Zyxel CloudCNM SecuManager 3.1.0 and 3.1.1 has a hardcoded RSA SSH key for the root account within the /opt/mysql chroot directory tree.

The MobileIron agents through 2021-03-22 for Android and iOS contain a hardcoded API key, used to communicate with the MobileIron SaaS discovery API, as demonstrated by Mobile@Work (aka com.mobileiron). The key is in com/mobileiron/registration/RegisterActivity.java and can be used for api/v1/gateway/customers/servers requests. NOTE: Vendor states that this is an opt-in feature to the product - it is not enabled by default and customers cannot enable it without an explicit email to support. At this time, they do not plan change to make any changes to this feature.

A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X-200RNA switch family (All versions < V3.2.7), SCALANCE X-300 switch family (incl. X408 and SIPLUS NET variants) (All versions < V4.1.0). Devices do not create a new unique private key after factory reset. An attacker could leverage this situation to a man-in-the-middle situation and decrypt previously captured traffic.

A vulnerability has been identified in SCALANCE X-200 switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (All versions < V5.2.5), SCALANCE X-200IRT switch family (incl. SIPLUS NET variants) (All versions < V5.5.0), SCALANCE X-200RNA switch family (All versions < V3.2.7). Devices create a new unique key upon factory reset, except when used with C-PLUG. When used with C-PLUG the devices use the hardcoded private RSA-key shipped with the firmware-image. An attacker could leverage this situation to a man-in-the-middle situation and decrypt previously captured traffic.

Rockwell Automation ISaGRAF Runtime Versions 4.x and 5.x includes the functionality of setting a password that is required to execute privileged commands. The password value passed to ISaGRAF Runtime is the result of encryption performed with a fixed key value using the tiny encryption algorithm (TEA) on an entered or saved password. A remote, unauthenticated attacker could pass their own encrypted password to the ISaGRAF 5 Runtime, which may result in information disclosure on the device.

An information disclosure vulnerability exists due to the hardcoded TLS key of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102. A specially-crafted man-in-the-middle attack can lead to a disclosure of sensitive information. An attacker can perform a man-in-the-middle attack to trigger this vulnerability.