CVE-2020-1665
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 · uneditedOn Juniper Networks MX Series and EX9200 Series, in a certain condition the IPv6 Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) protection might not take affect when it reaches the threshold condition. The DDoS protection allows the device to continue to function while it is under DDoS attack, protecting both the Routing Engine (RE) and the Flexible PIC Concentrator (FPC) during the DDoS attack. When this issue occurs, the RE and/or the FPC can become overwhelmed, which could disrupt network protocol operations and/or interrupt traffic. This issue does not affect IPv4 DDoS protection. This issue affects MX Series and EX9200 Series with Trio-based PFEs (Packet Forwarding Engines). Please refer to https://kb.juniper.net/KB25385 for the list of Trio-based PFEs. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX series and EX9200 Series: 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R3-S4; 17.2X75 versions prior to 17.2X75-D102, 17.2X75-D110; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S8; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S11, 17.4R3-S2; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R2-S7, 18.2R3, 18.2R3-S3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D30; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R2-S4, 18.3R3-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 confidenceOn Juniper MX Series and EX9200 Series routers with Trio-based Packet Forwarding Engines, the IPv6 Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) protection mechanism fails to activate when traffic reaches the configured threshold under certain conditions. This allows the Routing Engine (RE) and/or Flexible PIC Concentrator (FPC) to become overwhelmed, disrupting network protocol operations and interrupting traffic. IPv4 DDoS protection is not affected.
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= 17.2= 17.2x75= 17.3= 17.4= 18.2= 18.2x75= 18.3CVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
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.
-
Identify device modelRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show version' to confirm the device is a Juniper MX Series or EX9200 Series routerAffected if Device is not MX Series or EX9200 - these are the only affected platforms listed
-
Check Junos software versionRun 'show version' to obtain the installed Junos versionAffected if Version matches any of the affected releases: 17.2, 17.2x75, 17.3, 17.4, 18.2, 18.2x75, or 18.3 (exact versions as listed in the advisory)
-
Confirm Trio-based Packet Forwarding EngineRun 'show chassis pic' or check the hardware inventory for Trio-based PFE - MX Series typically use Trio chipsetsAffected if PFE is Trio-based - the vulnerability applies specifically to Trio-based PFEs; non-Trio platforms are not affected
-
Verify IPv6 DDoS protection configurationRun 'show ddos-protection protocols' to inspect IPv6 DDoS protection status and configured thresholdsAffected if IPv6 DDoS protection is configured but fails to activate when traffic reaches threshold - this is the bypass condition
-
Monitor for IPv6 traffic-induced RE/FPC overloadRun 'show system processes' and 'show chassis fpc' to check for RE or FPC resource exhaustion correlating with high IPv6 trafficAffected if RE or FPC becomes overwhelmed during IPv6 traffic spikes while IPv4 traffic does not cause similar issues - indicating the IPv6 DDoS protection is not activating properly
A user is affected if they have an MX Series or EX9200 router with Trio-based PFE running any of the listed Junos versions (17.2 through 18.3) and observe RE or FPC overload during IPv6 traffic bursts despite having IPv6 DDoS protection configured.
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 dataApply the appropriate Junos OS software update from Juniper Networks (versions specified in the advisory: 17.2R3-S4+, 17.2X75-D102/D110+, 17.3R3-S8+, 17.4R2-S11/17.4R3-S2+, 18.2R2-S7/18.2R3/18.2R3-S3+, 18.2X75-D30+, or 18.3R2-S4/18.3R3-S2+) to remediate the IPv6 DDoS protection bypass.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-1665 — 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-2020-1665 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