CVE-2018-0060
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 · uneditedAn improper input validation weakness in the device control daemon process (dcd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an attacker to cause a Denial of Service to the dcd process and interfaces and connected clients when the Junos device is requesting an IP address for itself. Junos devices are not vulnerable to this issue when not configured to use DHCP. Affected releases are Juniper Networks Junos OS: 12.1X46 versions prior to 12.1X46-D40 on SRX Series; 12.3X48 versions prior to 12.3X48-D20 on SRX Series; 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D40 on EX2200/VC, EX3200, EX3300/VC, EX4200, EX4300, EX4550/VC, EX4600, EX6200, EX8200/VC (XRE), QFX3500, QFX3600, QFX5100; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D20 on SRX Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D68 on QFX10000 Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D235 on QFX5200/QFX5110; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D495 on NFX150, NFX250; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D590 on EX2300/EX3400; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S2.
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 confidenceImproper input validation in the device control daemon (dcd) process of Junos OS allows an attacker to cause denial of service by sending specially crafted DHCP packets when the device is requesting an IP address for itself. The vulnerability affects the dcd process, connected interfaces, and clients. Devices not configured to use DHCP are not vulnerable.
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= 15.1= 15.1x49= 15.1x53= 14.1x53CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' or 'show version detail' to display the installed Junos OS versionAffected if The installed version matches any of: 12.1x46, 12.3x48, 15.1, 15.1x49, 15.1x53, 14.1x53 (or falls within the 12.1X46, 12.3X48, 14.1X53, 15.1, 15.1X49, 15.1X53 families before the fixed releases)
-
Verify DHCP client configurationRun 'show interfaces' and look for 'inet dhcp' or run 'show configuration interfaces | display set | match dhcp' to identify interfaces configured with DHCP clientAffected if Any interface is configured with 'family inet dhcp' or 'dhcp' client settings, indicating the device uses DHCP to obtain IP addresses
-
Confirm DHCP client status on interfacesRun 'show dhcp client binding' to display active DHCP client bindings on the deviceAffected if Any active DHCP client bindings exist, meaning the device is currently acting as a DHCP client and is actively requesting an IP address
-
Review system services configurationRun 'show configuration system services' or check for DHCP-related services in the configurationAffected if DHCP client services are enabled in the system services configuration
A device is affected if it runs a vulnerable Junos OS version (12.1x46, 12.3x48, 15.1, 15.1x49, 15.1x53, or 14.1x53) AND has DHCP client functionality enabled on any interface, since the vulnerability requires the device to be requesting an IP address via DHCP.
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 fixed versions specified (12.1X46-D40, 12.3X48-D20, 14.1X53-D40, 15.1X49-D20, 15.1X53-D68, 15.1X53-D235, 15.1X53-D495, 15.1X53-D590, or 15.1R7-S2 depending on platform). Alternatively, if DHCP is not required, disable DHCP client functionality to eliminate the attack surface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-0060 — 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-2018-0060 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