CVE-2023-44191
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 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling vulnerability in Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause Denial of Service (DoS). On all Junos OS QFX5000 Series and EX4000 Series platforms, when a high number of VLANs are configured, a specific DHCP packet will cause PFE hogging which will lead to dropping of socket connections. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS on QFX5000 Series and EX4000 Series * 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S5; * 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S5; * 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S5; * 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3-S4; * 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3-S3; * 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R3-S1; * 22.3 versions prior to 22.3R2-S2, 22.3R3; * 22.4 versions prior to 22.4R2. This issue does not affect Juniper Networks Junos OS versions prior to 21.1R1
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 confidenceAn unauthenticated network attacker can send a specific DHCP packet to QFX5000 Series and EX4000 Series switches with many VLANs configured, causing Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) resource exhaustion (hogging). This leads to socket connection drops and complete Denial of Service.
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= 21.1= 21.2= 21.3= 21.4= 22.1= 22.2= 22.3= 22.4CVSS 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
- 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 check the physical device label to confirm it is a QFX5000 Series or EX4000 Series switchAffected if Device is NOT a QFX5000 or EX4000 series switch (other models are not affected by this CVE)
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' or 'show version detail' to retrieve the installed Junos OS versionAffected if Version matches 21.1, 21.2, 21.3, 21.4, 22.1, 22.2, 22.3, or 22.4 (any of the listed affected versions)
-
Count configured VLANsRun 'show vlans | count' or 'show configuration vlans | count' to determine the number of VLANs configured on the deviceAffected if Many VLANs are configured (the vulnerability triggers when a specific DHCP packet is processed with numerous VLANs present)
-
Verify DHCP service is accessibleRun 'show services dhcp summary' or check 'show configuration forwarding-options helpers' to see if DHCP relay/helper is enabledAffected if DHCP is enabled or the switch is directly accessible to unauthenticated network attackers on VLANs with DHCP traffic
A user is affected if the device is a QFX5000 or EX4000 series switch running Junos 21.1-22.4 with many VLANs configured and DHCP traffic is present on the network.
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 (21.1R3-S5, 21.2R3-S5, 21.3R3-S5, 21.4R3-S4, 22.1R3-S3, 22.2R3-S1, 22.3R2-S2/22.3R3, or 22.4R2 or later) or apply available vendor patches.
Upgrade to 21.1R3-S5 or later (21.1 branch), 21.2R3-S5 or later (21.2 branch), 21.3R3-S5 or later (21.3 branch), 21.4R3-S4 or later (21.4 branch), or any 22.x version beyond the fixed releases listed above
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version on the QFX5000 Series or EX4000 Series device using 'show version'
- 2. Determine if the current version is affected (21.1 before 21.1R3-S5, 21.2 before 21.2R3-S5, 21.3 before 21.3R3-S5, 21.4 before 21.4R3-S4, 22.1 before 22.1R3-S3, 22.2 before 22.2R3-S1, 22.3 before 22.3R2-S2/22.3R3, or 22.4 before 22.4R2)
- 3. Plan maintenance window as upgrade requires system reboot
- 4. Download the appropriate fixed Junos OS version from Juniper support portal (supportportal.juniper.net)
- 5. Upload the upgrade image to the device using 'request system software add <package>' or via USB
- 6. Reboot the device using 'request system reboot'
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is running with 'show version'
- 8. Verify DHCP relay/relay functionality is working and no PFE hogging occurs
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-2023-44191 — 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-2023-44191 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