CVE-2023-44181
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 Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard vulnerability in storm control of Juniper Networks Junos OS QFX5k devices allows packets to be punted to ARP queue causing a l2 loop resulting in a DDOS violations and DDOS syslog. This issue is triggered when Storm control is enabled and ICMPv6 packets are present on device. This issue affects Juniper Networks: Junos OS * All versions prior to 20.2R3-S6 on QFX5k; * 20.3 versions prior to 20.3R3-S5 on QFX5k; * 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S5 on QFX5k; * 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S4 on QFX5k; * 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S3 on QFX5k; * 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S2 on QFX5k; * 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3 on QFX5k; * 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3 on QFX5k; * 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R2 on QFX5k.
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 confidenceImproperly implemented security check in storm control on Juniper QFX5k devices causes ICMPv6 packets to be incorrectly punted to the ARP queue instead of proper handling. This misrouting creates a layer 2 loop, triggering DDOS violations and generating DDOS syslog messages when storm control is enabled and ICMPv6 traffic is present.
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< 20.2= 20.2= 20.3= 20.4= 21.1= 21.2= 21.3= 21.4= 22.1= 22.2CVSS 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 modelRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show version' to confirm the device is a QFX5k series switch (e.g., QFX5100, QFX5110, QFX5120, QFX5200, QFX5210)Affected if Device is a QFX5k series switch
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' and compare the installed Junos version against the affected list: < 20.2, 20.2, 20.3, 20.4, 21.1, 21.2, 21.3, 21.4, 22.1, 22.2Affected if Installed version matches any of the listed affected versions
-
Verify storm control is enabledRun 'show configuration storm-control' or 'show interfaces' with storm-control details to see if storm control is configured on any interfaceAffected if Storm control is enabled on one or more interfaces
-
Check for DDOS violation syslogsReview system logs (run 'show log messages' or 'show ddos protection statistics') for DDOS-related messages that coincide with ICMPv6 traffic patternsAffected if DDOS syslog messages are present and ICMPv6 traffic is flowing through the device
-
Confirm ICMPv6 traffic presenceRun 'show interface statistics' or packet capture on uplink ports to verify ICMPv6 packets are being processedAffected if ICMPv6 traffic is present on the network while storm control is enabled
A user is affected if they have a QFX5k device running an affected Junos version with storm control enabled and ICMPv6 traffic present, as evidenced by DDOS syslog messages.
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 · scoped20.2
Upgrade Junos OS on QFX5k devices to the fixed versions specified in the Juniper advisory (20.2R3-S6, 20.3R3-S5, 20.4R3-S5, 21.1R3-S4, 21.2R3-S3, 21.3R3-S2, 21.4R3, 22.1R3, or 22.2R2 and later).
20.2R3-S6, 20.3R3-S5, 20.4R3-S5, 21.1R3-S4, 21.2R3-S3, 21.3R3-S2, 21.4R3, 22.1R3, or 22.2R2 (depending on current branch)
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version on the QFX5k device using 'show version'
- 2. Determine the appropriate fixed release based on the current version branch (20.2.x -> 20.2R3-S6+, 20.3.x -> 20.3R3-S5+, 20.4.x -> 20.4R3-S5+, 21.1.x -> 21.1R3-S4+, 21.2.x -> 21.2R3-S3+, 21.3.x -> 21.3R3-S2+, 21.4.x -> 21.4R3+, 22.1.x -> 22.1R3+, 22.2.x -> 22.2R2+)
- 3. Download the appropriate Junos OS upgrade image from Juniper Networks support portal
- 4. Upload the upgrade image to the QFX5k device
- 5. Install the upgrade using 'request system software add <package name>' command
- 6. Reboot the device using 'request system reboot' command
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is installed using 'show version'
- 8. Confirm storm control functionality is operational and the infinite loop issue is resolved
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,872.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-44181 — 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-2023-44181 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