JunosOperating system · Juniper

CVE-2017-10619

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-10-13
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
When Express Path (formerly known as service offloading) is configured on Juniper Networks SRX1400, SRX3400, SRX3600, SRX5400, SRX5600, SRX5800 in high availability cluster configuration mode, certain multicast packets might cause the flowd process to crash, halting or interrupting traffic from flowing through the device and triggering RG1+ (data-plane) fail-over to the secondary node. Repeated crashes of the flowd process may constitute an extended denial of service condition. This service is not enabled by default and is only supported in high-end SRX platforms. Affected releases are Juniper Networks Junos OS 12.3X48 prior to 12.3X48-D45, 15.1X49 prior to 15.1X49-D80 on SRX1400, SRX3400, SRX3600, SRX5400, SRX5600, SRX5800.

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 confidence

When Express Path (service offloading) is enabled on Juniper SRX1400, SRX3400, SRX3600, SRX5400, SRX5600, and SRX5800 devices in high-availability cluster mode, specific multicast packets can trigger a flowd process crash, causing traffic interruption and forcing RG1+ (data-plane) failover to the secondary node. Repeated crashes create an extended denial-of-service condition.

MitigationUpgrade Junos OS to 12.3X48-D45 or later, or 15.1X49-D80 or later. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, disable Express Path if not required, or implement monitoring/alerting for flowd crashes and cluster failover events.

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
JunosOperating system
Affected:= 12.3x48= 15.1x49

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm device model is affected SRX series
    Run 'show chassis hardware' or check device model. Affected models: SRX1400, SRX3400, SRX3600, SRX5400, SRX5600, SRX5800
    Affected if Device is NOT one of the listed SRX models - not affected
  2. Verify high-availability cluster mode is enabled
    Run 'show chassis cluster status' or 'show system services redundancy' to confirm HA cluster is configured and active
    Affected if HA cluster mode is NOT enabled - not affected
  3. Confirm Express Path (service offloading) is enabled
    Run 'show services service-Accelerator status' or check the configuration under 'set services service-Accelerator' to verify Express Path is enabled
    Affected if Express Path is NOT enabled - not affected
  4. Check installed Junos version
    Run 'show version' or 'show system inventory' to identify the exact Junos version. Compare to affected versions 12.3x48 and 15.1x49 base releases
    Affected if Version is not 12.3x48 or 15.1x49 base release - not affected

Device is affected only if it is an SRX1400/3400/3600/5400/5600/5800 with HA cluster mode enabled AND Express Path service offloading enabled AND running Junos 12.3x48 or 15.1x49 base version.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade Junos OS to 12.3X48-D45 or later, or 15.1X49-D80 or later. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, disable Express Path if not required, or implement monitoring/alerting for flowd crashes and cluster failover events.

Fix this in Junos Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-10619 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-10619 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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