CVE-2020-1609
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 a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv6 packets who may then arbitrarily execute commands as root on the target device. This issue affects IPv6 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode.
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 command injection vulnerability exists in the Juniper JDHCPD daemon when configured in IPv6 relay mode on Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send specially crafted IPv6 packets to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on the affected device.
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= 15.1= 15.1x49= 15.1x53= 16.1= 16.2= 17.1= 17.2= 17.3= 17.4= 18.1= 18.2= 18.2x75CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/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.
-
Check the Junos OS versionRun 'show version' on the device CLI and compare the installed version against the affected ranges: 15.1, 15.1x49, 15.1x53, 16.1, 16.2, 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.4, 18.1, 18.2, 18.2x75Affected if The device runs any of the listed version numbers exactly as specified in the affected versions list
-
Verify JDHCPD daemon is configuredCheck the Junos configuration for DHCPv6 relay agent settings using 'show configuration | match jdhcpd' or review the system services dhcpv6 relay configurationAffected if JDHCPD daemon is configured and active on the device
-
Confirm IPv6 relay mode is enabledExamine the DHCPv6 relay configuration with 'show configuration forwarding-options helpers dhcpv6' or 'show configuration services dhcpv6 relay' to determine if IPv6 relay functionality is enabledAffected if IPv6 relay mode is explicitly configured and enabled in the DHCPv6 relay settings
-
Check for IPv6 interface bindingsReview 'show dhcpv6 relay bindings' or 'show interfaces' with IPv6 addresses to identify which interfaces have IPv6 configured and are bound to the relay serviceAffected if IPv6 is active on interfaces and the JDHCPD relay is bound to process IPv6 traffic
The device is affected only if it runs an affected Junos version AND has IPv6 relay mode actively configured for the JDHCPD daemon, which enables the command injection attack surface.
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 one of the listed fixed versions (15.1R7-S6, 15.1X49-D200, 16.1R7-S6, 17.1R2-S11, 17.2R2-S8, 17.3R3-S6, 17.4R2-S7, 18.1R3-S8, 18.2R3-S2, 18.2X75-D60, 18.3R3, 18.4R3, 19.1R2, 19.2R2, or 19.3R1 or later). If upgrading is not immediately feasible, disable IPv6 JDHCPD relay functionality as a compensating control.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-1609 — 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-2020-1609 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