CVE-2025-21591
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 Buffer Access with Incorrect Length Value vulnerability in the jdhcpd daemon of Juniper Networks Junos OS, when DHCP snooping is enabled, allows an unauthenticated, adjacent, attacker to send a DHCP packet with a malformed DHCP option to cause jdhcp to crash creating a Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Continuous receipt of these DHCP packets using the malformed DHCP Option will create a sustained Denial of Service (DoS) condition. This issue affects Junos OS: * from 23.1 before 23.2R2-S3, * from 23.4 before 23.4R2-S3, * from 24.2 before 24.2R2. This issue isn't applicable to any versions of Junos OS before 23.1R1. This issue doesn't affect vSRX Series which doesn't support DHCP Snooping. This issue doesn't affect Junos OS Evolved. There are no indicators of compromise for this issue.
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 confidenceThe jdhcpd daemon in Juniper Junos OS contains a buffer access vulnerability with incorrect length value when processing DHCP packets. When DHCP snooping is enabled, an adjacent unauthenticated attacker can send DHCP packets with malformed DHCP options, causing the jdhcpd daemon to crash and create a denial of service. Continuous receipt of these malformed packets sustains the DoS condition.
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= 23.1= 23.2= 23.4= 24.2CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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 OS versionRun 'show version' or 'show system information' to display the installed Junos OS versionAffected if Version listed is 23.1, 23.2, 23.4, or 24.2 (exact match to affected releases)
-
Verify DHCP snooping configurationRun 'show dhcp snooping' or 'show configuration | display set | match dhcp-snooping' to check if DHCP snooping is enabledAffected if DHCP snooping is enabled (this is required for the vulnerability to be exploitable)
-
Check jdhcpd daemon statusRun 'show system processes extensive | match jdhcpd' or check daemon health via 'request system process dump jdhcpd' if availableAffected if jdhcpd daemon is not running or has recently restarted unexpectedly
-
Review system logs for jdhcpd crashesRun 'show log messages | match jdhcpd' or 'show system core-dumps' to look for evidence of jdhcpd daemon crashesAffected if Recent jdhcpd crash events appear in logs with DHCP-related error details
Affected if running Junos OS version 23.1, 23.2, 23.4, or 24.2 AND DHCP snooping is currently enabled on the device.
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 to Junos OS version 23.2R2-S3, 23.4R2-S3, or 24.2R2 as appropriate for the deployed branch, or temporarily disable DHCP snooping if upgrade cannot be performed immediately.
Upgrade to 23.2R2-S3 / 23.4R2-S3 / 24.2R2 (or later) depending on your current branch
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version by running 'show version'
- 2. Based on current version, determine the minimum fixed release: if 23.1.x upgrade to 23.2R2-S3 or later; if 23.4.x upgrade to 23.4R2-S3 or later; if 24.2.x upgrade to 24.2R2 or later
- 3. Download the appropriate Junos OS upgrade image from the Juniper support portal (supportportal.juniper.net)
- 4. Back up the current configuration using 'request system backup' or similar
- 5. Upload the upgrade image to the device
- 6. Install the upgrade using 'request system software add <image>' and reboot
- 7. After reboot, verify the new version is running with 'show version'
- 8. Confirm DHCP snooping functionality is operational and the device is not crashing
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-2025-21591 — 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-2025-21591 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