CVE-2013-4684
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 · uneditedflowd in Juniper Junos 10.4 before 10.4S14, 11.4 before 11.4R8, 12.1 before 12.1R7, and 12.1X44 before 12.1X44-D15 on SRX devices, when PIM and NAT are enabled, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via crafted PIM packets, aka PR 842253.
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 · high confidenceA denial of service vulnerability exists in the flowd daemon on Juniper SRX devices running Junos 10.4 before 10.4S14, 11.4 before 11.4R8, 12.1 before 12.1R7, or 12.1X44 before 12.1X44-D15. When PIM (Protocol Independent Multicast) and NAT are both enabled, specially crafted PIM packets sent by remote attackers can cause the flowd daemon to crash, resulting in service disruption.
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 data= 10.4= 11.4= 12.1= 12.1x44all versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
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.
-
Check Junos versionRun 'show version' command on the SRX device to display the installed Junos software versionAffected if The version is 10.4 before 10.4S14, 11.4 before 11.4R8, 12.1 before 12.1R7, or 12.1X44 before 12.1X44-D15
-
Verify PIM protocol is enabledRun 'show configuration protocols pim' or 'show pim interface' to check if PIM is configured and activeAffected if PIM is enabled in the device configuration
-
Verify NAT is enabledRun 'show configuration nat' or 'show nat interface' to check if NAT rules are configuredAffected if NAT is enabled with active NAT rules or policies
-
Confirm both PIM and NAT coexistenceReview both configurations together - the vulnerability requires both PIM and NAT to be simultaneously enabledAffected if Both PIM protocol and NAT are simultaneously enabled on the device
A user is affected if the SRX device runs a vulnerable Junos version (10.4 pre-S14, 11.4 pre-R8, 12.1 pre-R7, or 12.1X44 pre-D15) AND has both PIM and NAT enabled concurrently.
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 dataUpgrade Junos to version 10.4S14, 11.4R8, 12.1R7, or 12.1X44-D15 or later. If immediate upgrade is not possible, consider disabling PIM if not required, or implement network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted PIM sources.
- 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-2013-4684 — 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-2013-4684 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