JunosOperating system · Juniper

CVE-2017-2301

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-05-30
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
On Juniper Networks products or platforms running Junos OS 11.4 prior to 11.4R13-S3, 12.1X46 prior to 12.1X46-D60, 12.3 prior to 12.3R12-S2 or 12.3R13, 12.3X48 prior to 12.3X48-D40, 13.2X51 prior to 13.2X51-D40, 13.3 prior to 13.3R10, 14.1 prior to 14.1R8, 14.1X53 prior to 14.1X53-D12 or 14.1X53-D35, 14.1X55 prior to 14.1X55-D35, 14.2 prior to 14.2R7, 15.1 prior to 15.1F6 or 15.1R3, 15.1X49 prior to 15.1X49-D60, 15.1X53 prior to 15.1X53-D30 and DHCPv6 enabled, when a crafted DHCPv6 packet is received from a subscriber, jdhcpd daemon crashes and restarts. Repeated crashes of the jdhcpd process may constitute an extended denial of service condition for subscribers attempting to obtain IPv6 addresses.

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

A denial of service vulnerability in the jdhcpd daemon in Junos OS allows remote attackers to cause the daemon to crash and restart by sending specially crafted DHCPv6 packets when DHCPv6 is enabled. The daemon lacks proper input validation for DHCPv6 packets, leading to a crash that can be repeatedly triggered for sustained DoS.

MitigationUpdate Junos OS to the specified patched versions for each branch (11.4R13-S3, 12.1X46-D60, 12.3R12-S2, etc.) or disable DHCPv6 if patching is not immediately feasible.

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:= 11.4= 12.1x46= 12.3= 12.3x48= 13.2x51= 13.3= 14.1= 14.1x53= 14.1x55= 14.2= 15.1= 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. Identify the Junos OS version
    Run 'show version' or 'show system information' at the Junos CLI to obtain the exact firmware version
    Affected if The displayed version matches any of these: 11.4, 12.1x46, 12.3, 12.3x48, 13.2x51, 13.3, 14.1, 14.1x53, 14.1x55, 14.2, 15.1, 15.1x49
  2. Determine if DHCPv6 is enabled
    Run 'show system services dhcpv6' or check the configuration with 'show configuration system services dhcpv6' to see if DHCPv6 service is configured
    Affected if DHCPv6 is configured and active on the device
  3. Verify jdhcpd daemon status
    Run 'show system processes jdhcpd' or check daemon status via 'show system processes extensive | match jdhcpd' to confirm the daemon is running
    Affected if The jdhcpd daemon is running, indicating DHCP services are active
  4. Check DHCPv6 binding or pool configuration
    Run 'show dhcpv6 binding' or 'show configuration system services dhcpv6 pool' to see if DHCPv6 address pools are configured
    Affected if DHCPv6 pools or bindings exist, confirming the service is in use

The device is affected if it runs any of the listed Junos versions AND has DHCPv6 enabled with the jdhcpd daemon active.

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

Update Junos OS to the specified patched versions for each branch (11.4R13-S3, 12.1X46-D60, 12.3R12-S2, etc.) or disable DHCPv6 if patching is not immediately feasible.

Fix this in Junos Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-2301 — 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-2017-2301 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