Skip to main content
ftrapani
Staff
Staff
February 20, 2026

Troubleshooting Tip: FortiManager v7.4.9 and v7.4.10 gets stuck at 50% during installation preparation due to address groups in SD-WAN templates

  • February 20, 2026
  • 0 replies
  • 933 views
Description This article describes how to identify and remediate a known issue that prevents FortiManager from completing installation under certain conditions.
Scope FortiManager v7.4.9 or v7.4.10, ADOM in v7.4, FortiGate in v7.2 or v7.4.
Solution

Due to a known issue introduced by FortiManager 7.4.9, installation attempts on managed devices may encounter issues and fail to complete.

 

Symptoms:

  • When trying to push Policy Package changes, the task gets stuck at 50% in the Copy Package phase before showing the Install Preview:
 

Bild (7).png

 

  • Simultaneously, the crashlog shows a segmentation fault of the securityconsole process:

 

diagnose debug crashlog read

2026-02-11 17:08:15 Firmware FMG-VM64 v7.4.10-build2778 260126 (GA.M)
2026-02-11 17:08:15 Application securityconsole
2026-02-11 17:08:15 Signal 11 (Segmentation fault)
2026-02-11 17:08:15 Pid 7346 ppid 7343 backtrace:
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56ad17c330]  libsegfault.so  +0x1330  print_trace+0x37/0x172
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56ad17c511]  libsegfault.so  +0x1511  catch_segfault+0xa6/0x11c
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a8f5d510]  libc.so.6  +0x3c510
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adc2b77f]  libcdb.so  +0x36777f
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adaf6df4]  libcdb.so  +0x232df4
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adaf75c3]  libcdb.so  +0x2335c3  pm3_override_run_handler+0x18d/0x213
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adaf3b2b]  libcdb.so  +0x22fb2b
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adaed804]  libcdb.so  +0x229804
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adaf45da]  libcdb.so  +0x2305da
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adb76da6]  libcdb.so  +0x2b2da6
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adb72b7d]  libcdb.so  +0x2aeb7d
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adb3a388]  libcdb.so  +0x276388
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adb43385]  libcdb.so  +0x27f385  pm3_copy_shared_obj_2_dev_vdom+0x1cb/0x514
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a914c6bf]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x386bf
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a914e906]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x3a906
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a915323a]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x3f23a  __compile_policy+0x56c/0x2af2
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a9155d3c]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x41d3c  sc_install_package+0x57c/0x621
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a9173967]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x5f967
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a915dbd9]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x49bd9
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a915f4b5]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x4b4b5  sc_run_handler+0x341/0x38f
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a915f5d1]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x4b5d1  security_console_run_svc+0xce/0x127
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a917631c]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x6231c  security_console_svc_handler+0x117/0x231
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adc096d8]  libcdb.so  +0x3456d8
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adbea719]  libcdb.so  +0x326719
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56adbebee2]  libcdb.so  +0x327ee2
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56ad191d19]  libfgfmevent.so  +0x11d19
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56ad196c9d]  libfgfmevent.so  +0x16c9d
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56ad190bfa]  libfgfmevent.so  +0x10bfa  fgfm_handle_event+0x97/0xce
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a9173d8b]  libsecurityconsolemain.so  +0x5fd8b  securityconsole_main+0x365/0x3ec
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x556849820214]  securityconsole  +0xb214
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x55684982029c]  securityconsole  +0xb29c
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x55684981fd35]  securityconsole  +0xad35  main+0x445/0x462
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a8f486ca]  libc.so.6  +0x276ca
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x7f56a8f48785]  libc.so.6  +0x27785  __libc_start_main+0x85/0x141
2026-02-11 17:08:15 [0x55684981fd81]  securityconsole  +0xad81

Root cause: If the two symptoms above are observed, it is most likely due to the presence of Address Groups in the configured SD-WAN Templates, as in the example below:

Bild (2).png

 

The workaround involves replacing the address groups with their individual member addresses. Once this replacement is done, the installation can proceed successfully.

 

This issue has been resolved in FortiManager v7.4.11, v7.6.5, and v8.0; therefore, it will not occur in a FortiManager v7.6 ADOM.