CVE-2016-1257
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 · uneditedThe Routing Engine in Juniper Junos OS 13.2R5 through 13.2R8, 13.3R1 before 13.3R8, 13.3R7 before 13.3R7-S3, 14.1R1 before 14.1R6, 14.1R3 before 14.1R3-S9, 14.1R4 before 14.1R4-S7, 14.1X51 before 14.1X51-D65, 14.1X53 before 14.1X53-D12, 14.1X53 before 14.1X53-D28, 14.1X53 before 4.1X53-D35, 14.2R1 before 14.2R5, 14.2R3 before 14.2R3-S4, 14.2R4 before 14.2R4-S1, 15.1 before 15.1R3, 15.1F2 before 15.1F2-S2, and 15.1X49 before 15.1X49-D40, when LDP is enabled, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (RPD routing process crash) via a crafted LDP packet.
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 confidenceThe Routing Engine in Juniper Junos OS contains a vulnerability when LDP (Label Distribution Protocol) is enabled. A remote attacker can send a specially crafted LDP packet to cause the RPD (routing process) to crash, resulting in denial of service. This affects multiple Junos releases from 13.2R5 through 15.1X49-D40.
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= 13.2= 13.3= 14.1= 14.1x51= 14.1x53= 14.2= 15.1= 15.1x49CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/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 installed Junos versionRun 'show version' or 'show version detail' via CLI to retrieve the exact Junos release (e.g., 13.2R5, 14.1R3, 15.1X49-D20)Affected if The version falls within 13.2R5 through 15.1X49-D40 (includes 13.2, 13.3, 14.1, 14.1x51, 14.1x53, 14.2, 15.1, 15.1x49 branches)
-
Verify LDP protocol is enabledRun 'show configuration protocols ldp' to view LDP configuration; run 'show ldp neighbor' to see active LDP adjacenciesAffected if LDP is configured under 'protocols ldp' or active LDP neighbors exist
You are affected if your Junos version is within the affected range AND LDP protocol is enabled or active on the device.
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 to the fixed Junos releases specified in the advisory (13.3R8, 14.1R6, 14.2R5, 15.1R3, etc.). If immediate patching is not feasible, consider disabling LDP if not required or implementing network filtering to restrict LDP traffic to trusted peers.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-1257 — 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-2016-1257 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