dbcve.org
JunosOperating system · Juniper

CVE-2021-0222

HIGH · 7.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2021-01-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
79/100
Remediation priority · High
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
A vulnerability in Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) to the device by sending certain crafted protocol packets from an adjacent device with invalid payloads to the device. These crafted packets, which should be discarded, are instead replicated and sent to the RE. Over time, a Denial of Service (DoS) occurs. Continued receipt of these crafted protocol packets will cause an extended Denial of Service (DoS) condition, which may cause wider traffic impact due to protocol flapping. An indication of compromise is to check "monitor interface traffic" on the ingress and egress port packet counts. For each ingress packet, two duplicate packets are seen on egress. This issue can be triggered by IPv4 and IPv6 packets. This issue affects all traffic through the device. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D53 on EX4300, QFX3500, QFX5100, EX4600; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6 on EX4300, QFX3500, QFX5100, EX4600; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S7 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600; 17.1 versions prior to 117.1R3-S2 on EX4300; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R1-S9 on EX4300; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R3-S3 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R2-S5, 17.3R3-S7 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S9, 17.4R3 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S9 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, EX2300, EX3400; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R2-S7 on EX4300; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S3 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, EX2300, EX3400; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R2-S3, on EX4300; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S7, 18.3R3-S1 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, QFX5120, EX4650, EX2300, EX3400; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, QFX5120, EX4650, EX2300, EX3400; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S4, 19.1R2-S1, 19.1R3 on EX4300, QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, QFX5120, EX4650, EX2300, EX3400; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S4, 19.2R2 on EX4300; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2 on QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, QFX5120, EX4650, EX2300, EX3400; 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R2-S1, 19.3R3 on EX4300; 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R1-S1, 19.3R2, 19.3R3 on QFX5100, EX4600, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210, QFX5120, EX4650, EX2300, EX3400;

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 packet processing flaw in Juniper Junos OS allows crafted IPv4/IPv6 packets with invalid payloads from adjacent attackers to be incorrectly replicated instead of discarded, causing duplicate packets to be forwarded to the Routing Engine. This creates a sustained DoS condition observable as 2:1 packet ratio on ingress vs egress interfaces.

MitigationApply Junos OS patches to versions at or beyond the fixed releases (e.g., 14.1X53-D53, 15.1R7-S6, 17.1R2-S11, 17.4R3, 18.4R3, 19.1R3, 19.2R2, 19.3R3) per the advisory; monitor interface traffic for the 2:1 packet duplication anomaly as an indicator of compromise.

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:= 14.1x53= 15.1= 16.1= 17.1= 17.2= 18.2= 18.3= 19.2= 19.3= 17.3= 17.4= 18.1

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
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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. Check Junos OS version
    Execute `show version` on the device CLI and note the installed Junos version string (e.g., 14.1X53, 15.1, 17.4R1, etc.)
    Affected if The installed version matches one of these affected versions: 14.1x53, 15.1, 16.1, 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.4, 18.1, 18.2, 18.3, 19.2, or 19.3
  2. Monitor ingress vs egress packet counts
    Run `show interfaces statistics` on relevant physical/logical interfaces and compare the packet counters on ingress versus egress over a time period; calculate the ratio of inbound to outbound packets
    Affected if A sustained 2:1 ratio (or approximately 2:1) is observed where ingress packet count is roughly double the egress count on one or more interfaces
  3. Verify adjacency attack surface
    Identify whether untrusted adjacent network devices or segments can send IPv4/IPv6 traffic directly to the affected device; review interface configurations and trust boundaries using `show configuration interfaces`
    Affected if The device processes IPv4/IPv6 traffic from adjacent (Layer 2 adjacent) untrusted networks and the version is affected

If the device runs an affected Junos version listed above AND exhibits a 2:1 packet duplication ratio between ingress and egress interfaces, the environment is likely affected by this CVE.

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

Apply Junos OS patches to versions at or beyond the fixed releases (e.g., 14.1X53-D53, 15.1R7-S6, 17.1R2-S11, 17.4R3, 18.4R3, 19.1R3, 19.2R2, 19.3R3) per the advisory; monitor interface traffic for the 2:1 packet duplication anomaly as an indicator of compromise.

Fix this in Junos Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
26.0 hours of engineering $4,580
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,328.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-0222 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2021-0222 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