CVE-2024-47501
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 · uneditedA NULL Pointer Dereference vulnerability in the packet forwarding engine (pfe) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600, and EX9200 with EX9200-15C allows a locally authenticated attacker with low privileges to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). In a VPLS or Junos Fusion scenario, the execution of specific show commands will cause all FPCs hosting VPLS sessions or connecting to satellites to crash and restart. This issue affects Junos on MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600 and EX9200 with EX9200-15C: * All version before 21.2R3-S1, * 21.3 versions before 21.3R3, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2.
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 NULL pointer dereference vulnerability in the packet forwarding engine (pfe) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX304, MX series with MPC10/11/LC9600, and EX9200 with EX9200-15C allows a locally authenticated low-privilege attacker to cause a Denial of Service by crashing and restarting all FPCs hosting VPLS sessions or connecting to satellites when executing specific show commands in VPLS or Junos Fusion scenarios.
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= 21.3= 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 model and hardwareRun 'show chassis hardware' or check the device model. Confirm it is an MX304, MX series with MPC10/11/LC9600 line cards, or EX9200 with EX9200-15C.Affected if Device model is MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600, or EX9200 with EX9200-15C.
-
Check Junos OS versionRun 'show version' and note the exact Junos OS version installed.Affected if Version is less than 21.2, equals 21.2, equals 21.3, or equals 21.4.
-
Verify VPLS configurationRun 'show configuration protocols vpls' or 'show vpls connections' to check if VPLS is configured.Affected if VPLS protocols are actively configured on the device.
-
Check for Junos Fusion configurationRun 'show configuration virtual-chassis' or 'show chassis fabric topology' to identify Junos Fusion satellite setups.Affected if Junos Fusion with satellite connections is configured.
-
Review FPC crash logsRun 'show log messages' and search for recent FPC restart events or NULL pointer dereference errors in the pfe.Affected if Recent FPC crashes or pfe errors are present in the system logs.
Device is affected if it is an MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600, or EX9200 with EX9200-15C, runs Junos OS 21.2/21.3/21.4, and has VPLS or Junos Fusion configured.
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 to version 21.2R3-S1, 21.3R3, 21.4R2 or later on affected MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600, and EX9200 with EX9200-15C platforms.
21.2R3-S1 (for <21.2), 21.3R3 (for 21.3.x), or 21.4R2 (for 21.4.x)
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version running on the affected device (MX304, MX with MPC10/11/LC9600, or EX9200 with EX9200-15C) using the command: show version
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on current version: if below 21.2, upgrade to 21.2R3-S1; if 21.3.x, upgrade to 21.3R3; if 21.4.x, upgrade to 21.4R2
- 3. Schedule a maintenance window as the upgrade will require a system reboot
- 4. Back up the current configuration using: file copy /config/juniper.conf /var/tmp/
- 5. Download the appropriate Junos upgrade image from the Juniper support portal (supportportal.juniper.net)
- 6. Transfer the upgrade image to the device using: file copy <source> /var/tmp/
- 7. Initiate the upgrade using: request system software add /var/tmp/<image-name> reboot
- 8. After reboot, verify the new version using: show version and confirm the fix is applied
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $11,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47501 — 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-2024-47501 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