CVE-2025-30650
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 Missing Authentication for Critical Function vulnerability in command processing of Juniper Networks Junos OS allows a privileged local attacker to gain access to Linux-based line cards as root. This issue affects systems running Junos OS using Linux-based line cards. Affected line cards include: * MPC7, MPC8, MPC9, MPC10, MPC11 * LC2101, LC2103 * LC480, LC4800, LC9600 * MX304 (built-in FPC) * MX-SPC3 * SRX5K-SPC3 * EX9200-40XS * FPC3-PTX-U2, FPC3-PTX-U3 * FPC3-SFF-PTX * LC1101, LC1102, LC1104, LC1105 This issue affects Junos OS: * all versions before 22.4R3-S8, * from 23.2 before 23.2R2-S6, * from 23.4 before 23.4R2-S6, * from 24.2 before 24.2R2-S3, * from 24.4 before 24.4R2, * from 25.2 before 25.2R2.
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 missing authentication vulnerability in command processing on Linux-based line cards in Juniper Junos OS allows a privileged local attacker to execute commands with root privileges on affected line cards (MPC7-11, LC2101/2103, LC480/4800/9600, MX304, MX-SPC3, SRX5K-SPC3, EX9200-40XS, FPC3 variants, LC1101-1105). The attacker must already have privileged local access to the system.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Check Junos OS versionExecute 'show version' or 'show version detail' on the device to retrieve the installed Junos OS versionAffected if The installed version is earlier than 22.4R3-S8, 23.2R2-S6, 23.4R2-S6, 24.2R2-S3, 24.4R2, or 25.2R2 (the fixed releases)
-
Identify installed line card typesExecute 'show chassis hardware' or 'show chassis fpc' to list the installed line cards and their model typesAffected if The output shows MPC, LC, MX, SRX, or EX line cards present in the system
-
Confirm line card firmware typeCheck if the line cards are Linux-based by examining 'show version' output for the line card firmware or by logging into the line card (if accessible) and checking the OSAffected if The line cards are running a Linux-based operating system rather than traditional Junos ASIC-based firmware
-
Verify current user privilegesExecute 'show system users' or 'show cli authorization' to determine the current user privilege levelAffected if The current user has privileged access (such as operator, super-user, or root access on the line card Linux subsystem)
A system is affected if it runs a Junos OS version before the fixed releases AND has affected line card types (MPC, LC, MX, SRX, or EX) running Linux-based firmware, and an attacker already has privileged local access to attempt the privilege escalation.
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 · scopedApply the appropriate Junos OS patch version (22.4R3-S8, 23.2R2-S6, 23.4R2-S6, 24.2R2-S3, 24.4R2, or 25.2R2 and later) based on your current branch. Restrict physical and console access to prevent local privilege escalation.
24.4R2 or 25.2R2 (choose based on current version and stability requirements)
- 1. Identify all Linux-based line cards (MPC7/8/9/10/11, LC2101, LC2103, LC480, LC4800, LC9600, MX304, MX-SPC3, SRX5K-SPC3, EX9200-40XS, FPC3-PTX-U2/U3, FPC3-SFF-PTX, LC1101/02/04/05) installed in the Juniper device
- 2. Check current Junos OS version with 'show version' command
- 3. Compare current version against vulnerable ranges: all versions before 22.4R3-S8, 23.2 before 23.2R2-S6, 23.4 before 23.4R2-S6, 24.2 before 24.2R2-S3, 24.4 before 24.4R2, 25.2 before 25.2R2
- 4. If vulnerable, plan upgrade to a fixed release: 22.4R3-S8, 23.2R2-S6, 23.4R2-S6, 24.2R2-S3, 24.4R2, or 25.2R2 (choose based on compatibility with existing configuration and other line cards)
- 5. Backup current configuration with 'request system configuration rescue save'
- 6. Download the appropriate Junos OS upgrade package from Juniper Networks
- 7. Upgrade the device using 'request system software add <package> reboot' command
- 8. After reboot, verify new Junos version and confirm all line cards are operational with 'show chassis fpc pic-status'
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-30650 — 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-2025-30650 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