ghsa-84c9-gp6c-qg45
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-01-12 03:30
Modified
2024-01-12 03:30
Details

An Unsupported Feature in the UI vulnerability in Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series and EX9200 Series allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause partial impact to the integrity of the device.

If the "tcp-reset" option is added to the "reject" action in an IPv6 filter which matches on "payload-protocol", packets are permitted instead of rejected. This happens because the payload-protocol match criteria is not supported in the kernel filter causing it to accept all packets without taking any other action. As a fix the payload-protocol match will be treated the same as a "next-header" match to avoid this filter bypass.

This issue doesn't affect IPv4 firewall filters.

This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series and EX9200 Series:

  • All versions earlier than 20.4R3-S7;
  • 21.1 versions earlier than 21.1R3-S5;
  • 21.2 versions earlier than 21.2R3-S5;
  • 21.3 versions earlier than 21.3R3-S4;
  • 21.4 versions earlier than 21.4R3-S4;
  • 22.1 versions earlier than 22.1R3-S2;
  • 22.2 versions earlier than 22.2R3-S2;
  • 22.3 versions earlier than 22.3R2-S2, 22.3R3;
  • 22.4 versions earlier than 22.4R1-S2, 22.4R2-S2, 22.4R3.
Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-21607"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-447"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-01-12T01:15:49Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "\nAn Unsupported Feature in the UI vulnerability in Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series and EX9200 Series allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause partial impact to the integrity of the device.\n\nIf the \"tcp-reset\" option is added to the \"reject\" action in an IPv6 filter which matches on \"payload-protocol\", packets are permitted instead of rejected. This happens because the payload-protocol match criteria is not supported in the kernel filter causing it to accept all packets without taking any other action. As a fix the payload-protocol match will be treated the same as a \"next-header\" match to avoid this filter bypass.\n\nThis issue doesn\u0027t affect IPv4 firewall filters.\n\nThis issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series and EX9200 Series:\n\n\n\n  *  All versions earlier than 20.4R3-S7;\n  *  21.1 versions earlier than 21.1R3-S5;\n  *  21.2 versions earlier than 21.2R3-S5;\n  *  21.3 versions earlier than 21.3R3-S4;\n  *  21.4 versions earlier than 21.4R3-S4;\n  *  22.1 versions earlier than 22.1R3-S2;\n  *  22.2 versions earlier than 22.2R3-S2;\n  *  22.3 versions earlier than 22.3R2-S2, 22.3R3;\n  *  22.4 versions earlier than 22.4R1-S2, 22.4R2-S2, 22.4R3.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
  "id": "GHSA-84c9-gp6c-qg45",
  "modified": "2024-01-12T03:30:49Z",
  "published": "2024-01-12T03:30:49Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-21607"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://supportportal.juniper.net/JSA75748"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4.0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.