CVE-2025-52982
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 Resource Shutdown or Release vulnerability in the SIP ALG of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series with MS-MPC allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). When an MX Series device with an MS-MPC is configured with two or more service sets which are both processing SIP calls, a specific sequence of call events will lead to a crash and restart of the MS-MPC. This issue affects Junos OS: * all versions before 21.2R3-S9, * 21.4 versions from 21.4R1, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S6, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R3-S6. As the MS-MPC is EoL after Junos OS 22.4, later versions are not affected. This issue does not affect MX-SPC3 or SRX Series devices.
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 resource management flaw in the SIP Application Layer Gateway (ALG) on Juniper MX Series routers with MS-MPC cards allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to trigger a denial of service. When two or more service sets are simultaneously processing SIP calls, a specific sequence of call events causes the MS-MPC to crash and restart.
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= 22.2CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 the device modelRun 'show chassis hardware' or 'show system information' to confirm the device is a Juniper MX Series routerAffected if The device is not an MX Series router (vulnerability only affects MX Series with MS-MPC)
-
Verify MS-MPC presenceRun 'show chassis hardware' and look for MS-MPC card in the hardware inventoryAffected if No MS-MPC card is installed (vulnerability requires MS-MPC hardware)
-
Check installed Junos versionRun 'show version' to obtain the Junos OS versionAffected if Version is < 21.2, or exactly 21.2, 21.4, or 22.2 (these versions are affected)
-
Confirm SIP ALG is enabledRun 'show configuration | display set | match sip' to check for SIP ALG configuration in the service setsAffected if SIP ALG is explicitly enabled in one or more service sets (vulnerability requires SIP ALG processing)
-
Identify multiple service setsRun 'show configuration services | display set | match service-set' to list all configured service setsAffected if Two or more service sets are configured and actively processing SIP traffic (vulnerability triggers when simultaneous SIP call processing occurs)
A user is affected if they have an MX Series router with MS-MPC, running a vulnerable Junos version (21.2, 21.4, 22.2, or below 21.2), with SIP ALG enabled across two or more service sets processing SIP calls concurrently.
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 software patch (21.2R3-S9, 22.2R3-S6, 22.4R3-S6, or 21.4R3-S9 depending on current version). If the MS-MPC is at end-of-life and cannot be patched, consider migrating to MX-SPC3 or alternative platforms.
22.4R3-S6 (or the next available 22.4R3-Sx service release)
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version running on the MX Series device with MS-MPC using 'show version'
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on current version: if <21.2 upgrade to 21.2R3-S9, if 21.4 upgrade to 21.4Rx (where x is the latest available), if 22.2 upgrade to 22.2R3-S6, if 22.4 upgrade to 22.4R3-S6
- 3. Download the appropriate Junos OS service release from the Juniper support portal
- 4. Verify the MS-MPC is in-service and plan maintenance window for upgrade
- 5. Upgrade Junos OS using the standard upgrade procedure (e.g., 'request system software add <package>')
- 6. After reboot, verify the MS-MPC is operational using 'show chassis fpc' and confirm SIP ALG is functioning
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-2025-52982 — 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-2025-52982 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