CVE-2018-0025
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 · uneditedWhen an SRX Series device is configured to use HTTP/HTTPS pass-through authentication services, a client sending authentication credentials in the initial HTTP/HTTPS session is at risk that these credentials may be captured during follow-on HTTP/HTTPS requests by a malicious actor through a man-in-the-middle attack or by authentic servers subverted by malicious actors. FTP, and Telnet pass-through authentication services are not affected. Affected releases are Juniper Networks SRX Series: 12.1X46 versions prior to 12.1X46-D67 on SRX Series; 12.3X48 versions prior to 12.3X48-D25 on SRX Series; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D35 on SRX Series.
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 confidenceIn Juniper SRX Series devices with HTTP/HTTPS pass-through authentication enabled, credentials sent by clients in the initial HTTP/HTTPS session can be captured by attackers during subsequent requests via man-in-the-middle attacks or through compromised authentication servers. This occurs because authentication credentials are exposed in cleartext or weakly protected in follow-on requests after the initial authentication.
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= 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Confirm Juniper SRX Series deviceRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show system information' to identify the device modelAffected if Device is not an SRX Series model
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' to obtain the installed Junos versionAffected if Version matches exactly 12.1X46, 12.3X48, or 15.1X49 (case-insensitive comparison)
-
Verify HTTP/HTTPS pass-through authentication is enabledExamine the security policy configuration using 'show configuration security policies' and look for 'authentication' settings within policies, or review the access profile configuration for pass-through authentication settingsAffected if HTTP or HTTPS pass-through authentication is configured and active on any security policy
A user is affected if they are running Junos version 12.1X46, 12.3X48, or 15.1X49 on an SRX Series device AND have HTTP/HTTPS pass-through authentication enabled in their security policies.
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 SRX Series devices to fixed releases: 12.1X46-D67 or later, 12.3X48-D25 or later, or 15.1X49-D35 or later. Until patching is feasible, avoid using HTTP/HTTPS pass-through authentication and consider network segmentation to reduce MITM exposure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,488.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0025 — 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-2018-0025 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