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 0.47% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-39542High confidence
Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved: A malformed CFM packet or specific transit traffic leads to FPC crash
Juniper Networks · Junos OS
8.7HighCVSS 4.0
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
An Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series with MPC10/11 or LC9600, MX304, and Junos OS Evolved on ACX Series and PTX Series allows an unauthenticated, network based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). This issue can occur in two scenarios: 1. If a device, which is configured with SFLOW and ECMP, receives specific valid transit traffic, which is subject to sampling, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. (This scenario is only applicable to PTX but not to ACX or MX.) 2. If a device receives a malformed CFM packet on an interface configured with CFM, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. Please note that the CVSS score is for the formally more severe issue 1. The CVSS score for scenario 2. is: 6.5 (CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) This issue affects Junos OS: * All versions before 21.2R3-S4, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S2; Junos OS Evolved: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8-EVO, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2-EVO.
What
An Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series with MPC10/11 or LC9600, MX304, and Junos OS Evolved on ACX Series and PTX Series allows an unauthenticated, network based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). This issue can occur in two scenarios: 1. If a device, which is configured with SFLOW and ECMP, receives specific valid transit traffic, which is subject to sampling, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. (This scenario is only applicable to PTX but not to ACX or MX.) 2. If a device receives a malformed CFM packet on an interface configured with CFM, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. Please note that the CVSS score is for the formally more severe issue 1. The CVSS score for scenario 2. is: 6.5 (CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) This issue affects Junos OS: * All versions before 21.2R3-S4, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S2; Junos OS Evolved: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8-EVO, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2-EVO.
Why
The product receives input that is expected to be well-formed - i.e., to comply with a certain syntax - but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input complies with the syntax.
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
An Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on MX Series with MPC10/11 or LC9600, MX304, and Junos OS Evolved on ACX Series and PTX Series allows an unauthenticated, network based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). This issue can occur in two scenarios: 1. If a device, which is configured with SFLOW and ECMP, receives specific valid transit traffic, which is subject to sampling, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. (This scenario is only applicable to PTX but not to ACX or MX.) 2. If a device receives a malformed CFM packet on an interface configured with CFM, the packetio process crashes, which in turn leads to an evo-aftman crash and causes the FPC to stop working until it is restarted. Please note that the CVSS score is for the formally more severe issue 1. The CVSS score for scenario 2. is: 6.5 (CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) This issue affects Junos OS: * All versions before 21.2R3-S4, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S2; Junos OS Evolved: * All versions before 21.2R3-S8-EVO, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R2-EVO.
Why
The product receives input that is expected to be well-formed - i.e., to comply with a certain syntax - but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input complies with the syntax.
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 → Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input → 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
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-1286 ↗
CWE-1286: Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input. The product receives input that is expected to be well-formed - i.e., to comply with a certain syntax - but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input complies with the syntax.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:LCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: 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.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCNoneVulnerable-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VINoneVulnerable-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VAHighVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SALowSubsequent-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited 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
- Affected
- Fixed
- 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 11 Jul 2024 · Last source change 2 Aug 2024, 04:26 UTC · CWE-1286 · Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-38068
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
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.