dbcve.org
CtpviewApplication · Juniper

CVE-2021-0296

HIGH · 7.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2021-10-19
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
83/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable 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
The Juniper Networks CTPView server is not enforcing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS). HSTS is an optional response header which allows servers to indicate that content from the requested domain will only be served over HTTPS. The lack of HSTS may leave the system vulnerable to downgrade attacks, SSL-stripping man-in-the-middle attacks, and weakens cookie-hijacking protections. This issue affects Juniper Networks CTPView: 7.3 versions prior to 7.3R7; 9.1 versions prior to 9.1R3.

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

The Juniper Networks CTPView server fails to enforce HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), an optional response header that instructs browsers to only access the site over HTTPS. Without HSTS, attackers can perform SSL-stripping man-in-the-middle attacks to downgrade connections to HTTP, intercepting or hijacking sessions and cookies.

MitigationUpgrade Juniper CTPView to version 7.3R7 or 9.1R3 or later, which contain the fix to enforce HSTS headers.

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
CtpviewApplication
Affected:= 7.3= 9.1

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
Network
Complexity
High
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

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. Confirm CTPView is running
    Access the CTPView web interface via browser or command line tool (curl) to verify the service is reachable
    Affected if CTPView is accessible and responding to HTTP/HTTPS requests
  2. Check installed CTPView version
    Log into the CTPView server and run the command to display the software version (typically 'show version' or check the About/Version page in the web interface)
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.3 or exactly 9.1
  3. Verify HSTS header is absent
    Send an HTTP or HTTPS request to the CTPView server (e.g., curl -I https://<ctpview-host>/) and inspect the response headers for the presence of 'Strict-Transport-Security'
    Affected if The Strict-Transport-Security header is missing from all responses, including HTTPS

The environment is affected if CTPView version 7.3 or 9.1 is running AND the Strict-Transport-Security header is not present in HTTP responses from the server.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade Juniper CTPView to version 7.3R7 or 9.1R3 or later, which contain the fix to enforce HSTS headers.

Recommended fix High confidence

CTPView 7.3R7 (or later) or CTPView 9.1R3 (or later)

  1. 1. Identify the current CTPView version installed in your environment
  2. 2. For CTPView 7.3.x: Plan upgrade to version 7.3R7 or later
  3. 3. For CTPView 9.1.x: Plan upgrade to version 9.1R3 or later
  4. 4. Review Juniper Networks upgrade documentation for CTPView
  5. 5. Perform a backup of current CTPView configuration
  6. 6. Execute the upgrade to the appropriate fixed version
  7. 7. Verify HSTS is now enabled by inspecting HTTP response headers from the CTPView server
  8. 8. Confirm the Strict-Transport-Security header is present in responses
Caveat Review Juniper upgrade documentation for compatibility notes and potential impact on existing configurations

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Ctpview Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,090
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-0296 — 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-2021-0296 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