CVE-2008-2169
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in Avici routers allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (dropped session) via crafted BGP UPDATE messages, leading to route flapping, possibly a related issue to CVE-2007-6372.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis is a vulnerability in Avici routers' handling of BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) UPDATE messages. Remote attackers can send specially crafted BGP UPDATE messages that cause the router to drop sessions and trigger route flapping, where routing tables continuously oscillate between routes. This is the second BGP-related vulnerability in Avici routers (related to CVE-2007-6372).
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versions= 1b= 2b= 2b\+= bhall versionsall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify router model and manufacturerCheck the device model via CLI command 'show version' or SNMP query, or physically inspect the device labelAffected if Router is an Avici Router, Hitachi Gr2000, Gr3000, or Gr4000 (all are affected)
-
Check firmware versionExecute 'show version' or 'show firmware' to retrieve the installed firmware versionAffected if Any version (all Avici Router, Gr3000, Gr4000 versions are affected; Gr2000 versions 1b, 2b, 2b+, bh are affected)
-
Confirm BGP is enabledRun 'show ip bgp' or 'show bgp neighbor' to check if BGP protocol is configured and runningAffected if BGP is enabled and configured with active neighbors (vulnerability is in BGP UPDATE message handling)
-
Check if BGP MD5 authentication is missingReview BGP neighbor configuration using 'show ip bgp neighbor' or 'show running-config' to verify if 'md5' or 'password' authentication is configured between BGP peersAffected if BGP is enabled but MD5 authentication is NOT configured between peers
A system is affected if it is an Avici or Hitachi Gr2000/3000/4000 router running BGP without MD5 authentication configured on BGP peers
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement BGP MD5 authentication between peers to verify message integrity, apply traffic filtering at network edges to block malformed BGP packets, and contact Avici for firmware updates or consider router replacement if patches are unavailable.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-2169 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-2169 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data