CVE-2024-39561
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 Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in the flow daemon (flowd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX4600 and SRX5000 Series allows an attacker to send TCP packets with SYN/FIN or SYN/RST flags, bypassing the expected blocking of these packets. A TCP packet with SYN/FIN or SYN/RST should be dropped in flowd. However, when no-syn-check and Express Path are enabled, these TCP packets are unexpectedly transferred to the downstream network. This issue affects Junos OS on SRX4600 and SRX5000 Series: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8, * from 21.4 before 21.4R3-S7, * from 22.1 before 22.1R3-S6, * from 22.2 before 22.2R3-S4, * from 22.3 before 22.3R3-S3, * from 22.4 before 22.4R3-S2, * from 23.2 before 23.2R2, * from 23.4 before 23.4R1-S1, 23.4R2.
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 Juniper Junos OS flow daemon (flowd) on SRX4600 and SRX5000 Series allows TCP packets with abnormal SYN/FIN or SYN/RST flag combinations to bypass filtering when no-syn-check and Express Path are enabled. These illegal packets should be dropped but are incorrectly forwarded downstream.
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< 21.2= 21.2= 21.4= 22.1= 22.2= 22.3= 22.4= 23.2= 23.4CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify device modelRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show system information' to confirm the SRX modelAffected if Device is NOT an SRX4600 or SRX5000 Series (vulnerability only applies to these models)
-
Verify Junos OS versionRun 'show version' and compare the installed version against the affected list: <21.2, 21.2, 21.4, 22.1, 22.2, 22.3, 22.4, 23.2, 23.4Affected if Version matches any of the affected versions listed in the CVE
-
Confirm Express Path is enabledRun 'show security flow status' and look for Express Path or ESP acceleration status; alternatively check configuration for 'set security express-path'Affected if Express Path is enabled on the device
-
Confirm no-syn-check is enabledRun 'show configuration security flow' and look for 'no-syn-check' under the flow settings, or check the config with 'show configuration | match no-syn-check'Affected if no-syn-check is configured in the security flow settings
User is affected only if: (1) device is SRX4600 or SRX5000 Series, (2) Junos version matches the affected list, AND (3) BOTH Express Path and no-syn-check are simultaneously enabled, allowing malformed SYN/FIN or SYN/RST TCP packets to bypass filtering.
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 · scoped21.2
Apply the appropriate Junos OS patch or upgrade to a fixed version (21.2R3-S8, 21.4R3-S7, 22.1R3-S6, 22.2R3-S4, 22.3R3-S3, 22.4R3-S2, 23.2R2, 23.4R1-S1, or 23.4R2) per the Juniper advisory. Test Express Path functionality post-update.
Upgrade to 21.2R3-S8, 21.4R3-S7, 22.1R3-S6, 22.2R3-S4, 22.3R3-S3, 22.4R3-S2, 23.2R2, or 23.4R2 (or later) depending on your current branch
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version on the SRX4600 or SRX5000 Series device using 'show version'
- 2. Determine which upgrade path applies based on current version (see upgrade_path field)
- 3. Download the appropriate fixed Junos OS release from Juniper Networks support portal
- 4. Upload the Junos OS upgrade package to the device using 'file copy' or USB storage
- 5. Install the upgrade using 'request system software add <package-name>' command
- 6. Reboot the device after installation completes using 'request system reboot'
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is running with 'show version' and confirm the fix is applied
- 8. If using no-syn-check and Express Path features, verify that SYN/FIN and SYN/RST packets are now properly dropped
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,760.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-39561 — 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-2024-39561 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