CVE-2026-57032
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 Handling of Undefined Parameters vulnerability in the packet forwarding engine (pfe) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on EX Series devices allows an authenticated attacker with low privileges to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). If an attempt is made to subscribe to an unsupported telemetry sensor path on EX2300, EX3400, EX4000, EX4100 and EX4400 via gRPC, this causes the FPC to crash. This leads to a complete service outage until the module has automatically restarted. The following log message can be seen when this issue happens: agentd[<PID>]: AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND: No resource name found for <sensor> This issue affects Junos OS on EX2300, EX3400, EX4000, EX4100 and EX4400 devices: * all versions before 23.2R2-S7, * 23.4 versions before 23.4R2-S8, * 24.2 versions before 24.2R2-S5, * 24.4 versions before 24.4R2.
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 confidenceImproper handling of undefined parameters in the packet forwarding engine (pfe) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on EX Series allows an authenticated low-privilege attacker to cause FPC crashes by subscribing to unsupported telemetry sensor paths via gRPC, leading to complete service outage until automatic 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< 23.2= 23.2= 23.4= 24.2= 24.4CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Verify Junos OS versionRun 'show version' command on the device CLI to obtain the installed Junos OS versionAffected if Version is before 23.2, or is in the 23.2, 23.4, 24.2, or 24.4 release families (and not at fixed sub-versions)
-
Confirm gRPC service is enabledRun 'show configuration system services grpc' to check if gRPC service is configured and activeAffected if gRPC is enabled and accessible to the attacker (authenticated low-privilege user)
-
Check for AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND log messagesRun 'show log messages | match AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND' or review system logs for these specific messagesAffected if Log messages contain AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND entries indicating exploitation attempts
-
Verify FPC status for crashesRun 'show chassis fpc' to check for any FPCs that are offline or have crashedAffected if Any FPC shows as offline or crashed, especially following gRPC sensor subscription activity
User is affected if Junos OS version matches the affected releases, gRPC is enabled, and exploitation via gRPC sensor subscription has occurred leading to FPC crashes or AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND logs.
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 · scoped23.2
Upgrade Junos OS to fixed versions (23.2R2-S7, 23.4R2-S8, 24.2R2-S5, 24.4R2 or later); until then, restrict gRPC access to trusted users and monitor for AGENTD_RESOURCE_NOT_FOUND log messages.
23.2R2-S7 or later (23.2 branch), 23.4R2-S8 or later (23.4 branch), 24.2R2-S5 or later (24.2 branch), or 24.4R2 or later (24.4 branch)
- 1. Identify the current Junos OS version running on the EX Series device (EX2300, EX3400, EX4000, EX4100, or EX4400) using 'show version' command.
- 2. Determine which upgrade path applies based on current version branch (23.2, 23.4, 24.2, or 24.4).
- 3. For devices on 23.2 branch: upgrade to 23.2R2-S7 or later.
- 4. For devices on 23.4 branch: upgrade to 23.4R2-S8 or later.
- 5. For devices on 24.2 branch: upgrade to 24.2R2-S5 or later.
- 6. For devices on 24.4 branch: upgrade to 24.4R2 or later.
- 7. For devices on versions before 23.2: upgrade to 23.2R2-S7 or later.
- 8. Before upgrading, review Juniper release notes for any compatibility notes or prerequisites.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57032 — 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-2026-57032 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