CVE-2017-10614
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in telnetd service on Junos OS allows a remote attacker to cause a limited memory and/or CPU consumption denial of service attack. This issue was found during internal product security testing. Affected releases are Juniper Networks Junos OS 12.1X46 prior to 12.1X46-D45; 12.3X48 prior to 12.3X48-D30; 14.1 prior to 14.1R4-S9, 14.1R8; 14.2 prior to 14.2R6; 15.1 prior to 15.1F5, 15.1R3; 15.1X49 prior to 15.1X49-D40; 15.1X53 prior to 15.1X53-D232, 15.1X53-D47.
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 vulnerability in the telnetd service on Juniper Junos OS allows a remote attacker to cause limited memory and CPU consumption, resulting in denial of service. The attacker does not require authentication to trigger this condition.
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= 12.1x46= 12.3x48= 14.1= 14.2= 15.1= 15.1x49= 15.1x53CVSS 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:3.0/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 the Junos OS versionExecute 'show version' or 'show version detail' on the device CLI to retrieve the installed Junos OS versionAffected if The version matches or falls within the affected ranges: 12.1X46, 12.3X48, 14.1, 14.2, 15.1, 15.1X49, or 15.1X53 series
-
Verify telnetd service statusExecute 'show system services' or review the active configuration with 'show configuration system services' to determine if telnet service is enabledAffected if The telnet service is listed as enabled under system services
-
Confirm telnetd daemon is listeningUse 'show system connections | match 23' or check 'netstat -an | grep :23' to verify if the device is listening on TCP port 23Affected if Port 23 is open and listening for telnet connections
A device is affected if it runs a Junos version within the specified ranges AND has the telnetd service enabled, allowing remote unauthenticated attackers to cause denial of service via telnet.
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 OS to the specified fixed versions (12.1X46-D45 or later, 12.3X48-D30 or later, etc.) or disable the telnetd service if not required and use SSH instead.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $14,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-10614 — 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-2017-10614 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