Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 1.32% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2019
CVE-2019-0056High confidence
Junos OS: MX Series: An MPC10 Denial of Service (DoS) due to OSPF states transitioning to Down, causes traffic to stop forwarding through the device.
Juniper Networks · Junos OS
7.5HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Patch availableHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Juniper Networks Junos OS and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch available01
What, why and how
This issue only affects devices with three (3) or more MPC10's installed in a single chassis with OSPF enabled and configured on the device. An Insufficient Resource Pool weakness allows an attacker to cause the device's Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) states to transition to Down, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. This attack requires a relatively large number of specific Internet Mixed (IMIXed) types of genuine and valid IPv6 packets to be transferred by the attacker in a relatively short period of time, across three or more PFE's on the device at the same time. Continued receipt of the traffic sent by the attacker will continue to cause OSPF to remain in the Down starting state, or flap between other states and then again to Down, causing a persistent Denial of Service. This attack will affect all IPv4, and IPv6 traffic served by the OSPF routes once the OSPF states transition to Down. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX480, MX960, MX2008, MX2010, MX2020: 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R2-S4, 18.1R3-S5; 18.1X75 version 18.1X75-D10 and later versions; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R1-S5, 18.2R2-S3, 18.2R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S4, 18.3R2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S2, 18.4R2.
What
This issue only affects devices with three (3) or more MPC10's installed in a single chassis with OSPF enabled and configured on the device. An Insufficient Resource Pool weakness allows an attacker to cause the device's Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) states to transition to Down, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. This attack requires a relatively large number of specific Internet Mixed (IMIXed) types of genuine and valid IPv6 packets to be transferred by the attacker in a relatively short period of time, across three or more PFE's on the device at the same time. Continued receipt of the traffic sent by the attacker will continue to cause OSPF to remain in the Down starting state, or flap between other states and then again to Down, causing a persistent Denial of Service. This attack will affect all IPv4, and IPv6 traffic served by the OSPF routes once the OSPF states transition to Down. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX480, MX960, MX2008, MX2010, MX2020: 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R2-S4, 18.1R3-S5; 18.1X75 version 18.1X75-D10 and later versions; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R1-S5, 18.2R2-S3, 18.2R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S4, 18.3R2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S2, 18.4R2.
Why
The product's resource pool is not large enough to handle peak demand, which allows an attacker to prevent others from accessing the resource by using a (relatively) large number of requests for resources.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
What
This issue only affects devices with three (3) or more MPC10's installed in a single chassis with OSPF enabled and configured on the device. An Insufficient Resource Pool weakness allows an attacker to cause the device's Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) states to transition to Down, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. This attack requires a relatively large number of specific Internet Mixed (IMIXed) types of genuine and valid IPv6 packets to be transferred by the attacker in a relatively short period of time, across three or more PFE's on the device at the same time. Continued receipt of the traffic sent by the attacker will continue to cause OSPF to remain in the Down starting state, or flap between other states and then again to Down, causing a persistent Denial of Service. This attack will affect all IPv4, and IPv6 traffic served by the OSPF routes once the OSPF states transition to Down. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX480, MX960, MX2008, MX2010, MX2020: 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R2-S4, 18.1R3-S5; 18.1X75 version 18.1X75-D10 and later versions; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R1-S5, 18.2R2-S3, 18.2R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S4, 18.3R2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S2, 18.4R2.
Why
The product's resource pool is not large enough to handle peak demand, which allows an attacker to prevent others from accessing the resource by using a (relatively) large number of requests for resources.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Insufficient Resource Pool → disrupt the affected service
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-410 ↗
CWE-410: Insufficient Resource Pool. The product's resource pool is not large enough to handle peak demand, which allows an attacker to prevent others from accessing the resource by using a (relatively) large number of requests for resources.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 9 Oct 2019 · Last source change 16 Sept 2024, 18:29 UTC · CWE-410 · Insufficient Resource Pool
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-09-01
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2019-0863
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2019-0863 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2019-0863"}
- Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added vendor advisory: kb.juniper.net/JSA10954.kb.juniper.net ↗
- Before
- no authoritative guidance recorded
- After
- vendor advisory: kb.juniper.net/JSA10954
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.