CVE-2023-36850
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 · uneditedAn Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input vulnerability in the Connectivity Fault Management(CFM) module of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series(except MPC10, MPC11 and LC9600) allows an adjacent attacker on the local broadcast domain to cause a Denial of Service(DoS). Upon receiving a malformed CFM packet, the MPC crashes. Continued receipt of these packets causes a sustained denial of service. This issue can only be triggered when CFM hasn't been configured. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS All versions prior to 19.1R3-S10 on MX Series; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R3-S7 on MX Series; 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R3-S8 on MX Series; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R3-S12 on MX Series; 20.1 version 20.1R1 and later versions on MX Series; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R3-S7 on MX Series; 20.3 version 20.3R1 and later versions on MX Series; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S7 on MX Series; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S5 on MX Series; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S4 on MX Series; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S4 on MX Series; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3-S3 on MX Series; 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3-S2 on MX Series; 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R3 on MX Series; 22.3 versions prior to 22.3R2, 22.3R3 on MX Series; 22.4 versions prior to 22.4R2 on MX Series.
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 vulnerability in the Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) module of Juniper Junos OS on MX Series routers allows an adjacent attacker on the local broadcast domain to send malformed CFM packets that crash the MPC. The crash is triggerable only when CFM has not been configured, and continued attacks cause sustained DoS.
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= 19.1= 19.2= 19.3= 19.4= 20.1= 20.2= 20.3= 20.4= 21.1= 21.2= 21.3= 21.4CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 modelRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show version' to confirm the device is an MX Series routerAffected if Device is not an MX Series router - this vulnerability only affects MX Series
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' and compare the installed version number against the affected list: 19.1, 19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 20.1, 20.2, 20.3, 20.4, 21.1, 21.2, 21.3, 21.4Affected if Version matches exactly one of the listed affected versions
-
Determine if CFM is configuredRun 'show protocols oam' or 'show protocols cfm' to check for Connectivity Fault Management configurationAffected if CFM is NOT configured - the vulnerability triggers specifically when CFM has not been configured
-
Check for MPC crash logsRun 'show log messages' and search for MPC crash events or DPC/MPC related core dumps using 'show system core-dumps'Affected if Recent MPC crashes are present in logs without an obvious other cause
-
Assess network exposureReview interface configurations and network segment access to determine if adjacent attackers on the local broadcast domain could send packets to the deviceAffected if Device is accessible to unauthenticated adjacent attackers on broadcast domain segments used by MX interfaces
You are affected if you run an MX Series router on any of the affected Junos versions (19.1-21.4) with CFM not configured, and an adjacent attacker can reach the device on the local broadcast domain.
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 · scopedApply the vendor-supplied Junos OS patches for your specific version (see Juniper advisory). Until patched, monitor for MPC crashes and consider implementing network access controls to limit adjacent attackers.
Upgrade to 19.1R3-S10 or later (19.1x), 19.2R3-S7 or later (19.2x), 19.3R3-S8 or later (19.3x), or 19.4R3-S12 or later (19.4x) - or a later stable release branch
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version on the MX Series device using 'show version'
- 2. Plan an upgrade to one of the fixed versions based on your current branch: for 19.1x branch upgrade to 19.1R3-S10 or later; for 19.2x branch upgrade to 19.2R3-S7 or later; for 19.3x branch upgrade to 19.3R3-S8 or later; for 19.4x branch upgrade to 19.4R3-S12 or later
- 3. Download the appropriate Junos OS upgrade package from the Juniper Networks support portal
- 4. Upload the upgrade package to the MX Series device
- 5. Execute the upgrade using 'request system software add <package>' command
- 6. Reboot the device using 'request system reboot' command
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is installed using 'show version'
- 8. Confirm the CFM functionality is operational and the device is stable
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2023-36850 — 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-2023-36850 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