CVE-2024-47499
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 routing protocol daemon (RPD) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated, network based attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). In a scenario where BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is configured with rib-in pre-policy monitoring, receiving a BGP update with a specifically malformed AS PATH attribute over an established BGP session, can cause an RPD crash and restart. This issue affects: Junos OS: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R3-S8, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S4, * 22.3 versions before 22.3R3-S3, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R3-S2, * 23.2 versions before 23.2R2-S1, * 23.4 versions before 23.4R1-S2, 23.4R2; Junos OS Evolved: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8-EVO, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R3-S8-EVO, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S4-EVO, * 22.3 versions before 22.3R3-S3-EVO, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R3-S2-EVO, * 23.2 versions before 23.2R2-S1-EVO, * 23.4 versions before 23.4R1-S2-EVO, 23.4R2-EVO.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability exists in Juniper's routing protocol daemon (RPD) when BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) is configured with rib-in pre-policy monitoring. An unauthenticated attacker can send a specifically malformed AS PATH attribute in a BGP update over an established BGP session, causing the RPD to crash and restart, resulting in 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< 21.2= 21.2= 21.4= 22.2= 22.3= 22.4= 23.2= 23.4< 21.2= 21.2= 21.4= 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
- 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 Junos versionRun 'show version' or 'show version detail' to obtain the installed Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved versionAffected if The installed version matches one of the listed affected versions: any version < 21.2, or = 21.2, = 21.4, = 22.2, = 22.3, = 22.4, = 23.2, = 23.4
-
Verify BMP is configuredRun 'show configuration protocols bmp' to check if BGP Monitoring Protocol is enabledAffected if BMP configuration exists and the protocol is active
-
Confirm rib-in pre-policy monitoring is enabledRun 'show configuration protocols bmp station <station-name>' and look for 'rib-in pre-policy' or 'monitor rib-in pre-policy' under the BMP station configurationAffected if The rib-in pre-policy monitoring option is explicitly configured under BMP
-
Check for RPD crash logsRun 'show system crash' or examine /var/log/messages for recent rpd crash entries, looking for timestamps corresponding to the time window of interestAffected if Recent RPD crashes are present in the crash logs and BMP with rib-in pre-policy monitoring is configured
A system is affected if it runs a vulnerable Junos version, has BMP configured with rib-in pre-policy monitoring enabled, and shows evidence of RPD crashes.
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
Upgrade Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved to the specified patched versions (21.2R3-S8, 21.4R3-S8, 22.2R3-S4, 22.3R3-S3, 22.4R3-S2, 23.2R2-S1, or 23.4R1-S2/23.4R2 and later) for the respective branch. Until upgraded, consider disabling BMP rib-in pre-policy monitoring if not required.
Upgrade to the latest S-release in your current branch (e.g., 21.2R3-S8, 21.4R3-S8, 22.2R3-S4, 22.3R3-S3, 22.4R3-S2, 23.2R2-S1, or 23.4R2) or later stable release. For Junos OS Evolved, use the corresponding -EVO versions.
- 1. Identify the currently installed Junos OS/Evolved version using 'show version' command
- 2. Determine the current branch (e.g., 21.2, 21.4, 22.2, 22.3, 22.4, 23.2, 23.4)
- 3. Upgrade to the latest S-release (service release) for your current branch that contains the fix: For 21.2 branch upgrade to 21.2R3-S8 or later, for 21.4 branch upgrade to 21.4R3-S8 or later, for 22.2 branch upgrade to 22.2R3-S4 or later, for 22.3 branch upgrade to 22.3R3-S3 or later, for 22.4 branch upgrade to 22.4R3-S2 or later, for 23.2 branch upgrade to 23.2R2-S1 or later, for 23.4 branch up
- 4. If currently on an older branch (e.g., pre-21.2), upgrade to the earliest fixed version (21.2R3-S8) or a later stable branch
- 5. If upgrading across major branches (e.g., from 21.x to 22.x), review Juniper's upgrade documentation for compatibility and required intermediate steps
- 6. After upgrade, verify RPD is running using 'show routing-engine' and confirm BGP sessions are stable
- 7. Monitor the system for any anomalies after applying the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47499 — 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-2024-47499 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