CVE-2022-22205
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 · uneditedA Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime vulnerability in the Application Quality of Experience (appqoe) subsystem of the PFE of Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX Series allows an unauthenticated network based attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). Upon receiving specific traffic a memory leak will occur. Sustained processing of such specific traffic will eventually lead to an out of memory condition that prevents all services from continuing to function, and requires a manual restart to recover. A device is only vulnerable when advance(d) policy based routing (APBR) is configured and AppQoE (sla rule) is not configured for these APBR rules. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX Series: 20.3 versions prior to 20.3R3-S2; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S2; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R2-S1, 21.2R3; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R1-S2, 21.3R2. This issue does not affect Juniper Networks Junos OS versions prior to 20.3R1.
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 memory leak vulnerability exists in the Application Quality of Experience (appqoe) subsystem of the Packet Forwarding Engine in Juniper Junos OS on SRX Series firewalls. When advanced policy-based routing (APBR) is configured but AppQoE (sla rule) is NOT configured for those APBR rules, specific traffic triggers a memory leak that eventually exhausts memory, causing a denial of service requiring manual restart.
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= 20.3= 20.4= 21.1= 21.2= 21.3CVSS 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify device model and Junos versionRun 'show version' and 'show chassis hardware' commands to confirm SRX Series device and note the exact Junos OS version (e.g., 20.3R1, 20.4R1, etc.)Affected if Device is SRX Series AND Junos version matches 20.3, 20.4, 21.1, 21.2, or 21.3 (any subversion)
-
Check if APBR is configuredRun 'show configuration | match apbr' or 'show configuration security apbr' to see if advanced policy-based routing is enabledAffected if APBR configuration exists in the security policy
-
Identify APBR rules without AppQoERun 'show configuration security apbr' and examine each rule's 'then' clause. Check if 'sla' or 'appqoe' is configured under each rule's action. If 'sla rule <name>' is missing from any APBR rule, that rule is vulnerable.Affected if APBR rules exist where 'sla' or 'appqoe' configuration is absent from the rule's action block
Device is affected if it is an SRX running a vulnerable Junos version (20.3, 20.4, 21.1, 21.2, or 21.3) AND has APBR rules configured WITHOUT corresponding AppQoE (sla rule) settings.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Junos OS to a fixed version (20.3R3-S2 or later, 20.4R3-S2 or later, 21.1R3 or later, 21.2R2-S1/21.2R3 or later, or 21.3R1-S2/21.3R2 or later). Alternatively, ensure AppQoE (sla rule) is configured for all APBR rules to avoid the vulnerable condition.
20.3R3-S2, 20.4R3-S2, 21.1R3, 21.2R2-S1, 21.2R3, 21.3R1-S2, or 21.3R2 (depending on your current version branch)
- 1. Verify the device is SRX Series and confirm current Junos OS version with 'show version'
- 2. Confirm APBR is configured by running 'show services advanced-policy-based-routing'
- 3. If APBR is configured and AppQoE (sla rule) is not configured for these APBR rules, the device is vulnerable
- 4. Plan maintenance window for upgrade as it requires device reboot
- 5. Download the appropriate fixed version for your current branch: 20.3R3-S2, 20.4R3-S2, 21.1R3, 21.2R2-S1, 21.2R3, 21.3R1-S2, or 21.3R2
- 6. Upload the Junos OS upgrade package to the device
- 7. Install the upgrade using 'request system software add <package> reboot'
- 8. After reboot, verify the new version with 'show version'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-22205 — 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-2022-22205 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