CVE-2021-44228 Apache LOG4J vulnerability

[Ivar]

Would appreciate a response from Fortinet regarding the Apache log4 vulnerability if any Fortinet product

is affected.

Any information regarding updated IPS signature for CVE-2021-44228?

[AlexC-FTNT]

Do you have a deep-inspection SSL profile on the policy? Generally, if the payload is encrypted (in HTTPS) the packet contents will not be verified with certificate-inspection only

[FnUser]

All signatures updated and properly configured, still not getting triggered. I hope FN will look into it. I can trigger other ones, but not the ID51006

[boneyard]

ok, saw other question, eventually it worked for something indeed.

[DK2021]

see https://www.fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-21-245

[Carl_Windsor_FTNT · Accepted solution]

PSIRT advisory on impacted products can be found here:

https://www.fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-21-245

[Deepak_Girimaji_FTNT]

For FortiWEB, there is a new update for the WAF signatures to prevent attackers from performing variant remote code execution in Apache Log4j2 (CVE-2021-44228)
Reference: https://www.fortiguard.com/updates/websecurity?version=0.00306

[Deepak_Girimaji_FTNT]

There is a new update for the WAF signatures to prevent attackers from performing variant remote code execution in Apache Log4j2 (CVE-2021-44228)

Reference: https://www.fortiguard.com/updates/websecurity?version=0.00306

[Carl_Windsor_FTNT]

Note that the IPS signature changed to Default Block as of IPS DB 19.217

See our blog and advisory for more detail.

[jsexton]

We had a popup today on an end user machine indicated a detection and block for this. I can't find a reason for it, though. It's a workstation without Apache or Log4J installed. Does this plugin identify going to a vulnerable external website? My impression is that it only triggered on a machine if the machine itself was vulnerable.

[Carl_Windsor_FTNT]

Problem with this issue, the actual vulnerability can be behind the system being targetted (see the blog here).  FortiGate has no way of knowing if the server is vulnerable or of there is log4j somewhere in the path, just that the payload has been sent e.g. in a HTTP header.  This is the block you are seeing.

To know if you are potentially vulnerable, block outbound LDAP and look for triggers to the FW rule.