Security Resilience

CVE-2023-22405

Juniper Junos ≤ 20.2

Published
13 January 2023
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0031 22th percentile
Risk Priority 49 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-22405 is a medium-severity Improper Preservation of Consistency Between Independent Representations of Shared State (CWE-1250) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 22th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

An Improper Preservation of Consistency Between Independent Representations of Shared State vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an adjacent, unauthenticated attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) to device due to out…

more

of resources. When a device is configured with "service-provider/SP style" switching, and mac-limiting is configured on an Aggregated Ethernet (ae) interface, and then a PFE is restarted or the device is rebooted, mac-limiting doesn't work anymore. Please note that the issue might not be apparent as traffic will continue to flow through the device although the mac table and respective logs will indicate that mac limit is reached. Functionality can be restored by removing and re-adding the MAC limit configuration. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on QFX5k Series, EX46xx Series: All versions prior to 20.2R3-S5; 20.3 versions prior to 20.3R3-S5; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S4; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S3; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S1; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3 on; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3 on; 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R2 on.

CWE(s)
CWE-1250NVD-CWE-Other

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001 Data Obfuscation Command And Control
Adversaries may obfuscate command and control traffic to make it more difficult to detect.
attack.mitre.org →
T1001.001 Junk Data Command And Control
Adversaries may add junk data to protocols used for command and control to make detection more difficult.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003 OS Credential Dumping Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to dump credentials to obtain account login and credential material, normally in the form of a hash or a clear text password.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003.002 Security Account Manager Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to extract credential material from the Security Account Manager (SAM) database either through in-memory techniques or through the Windows Registry where the SAM database is stored.
attack.mitre.org →
T1003.003 NTDS Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to access or create a copy of the Active Directory domain database in order to steal credential information, as well as obtain other information about domain members such as devices, users, and access rights.
attack.mitre.org →
T1007 System Service Discovery Discovery
Adversaries may try to gather information about registered local system services.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-21595Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2024-39533Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2025-59957Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2023-44203Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2023-28984Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-33781Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2026-21910Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2024-30388Same product: Juniper Ex4650
CVE-2025-30644Same product: Juniper Ex4600
CVE-2024-47498Same product: Juniper Qfx5110

Affected Assets

juniper
junos
20.2, 20.3, 20.4, 21.1, 21.2 · ≤ 20.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V2.3.4
  • V4.2.1
  • V7.1.3
  • V7.6.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

DE.CM-09 partial match
blocks

Runtime data monitoring can surface consistency violations after they occur.

PR.DS-01 partial match
blocks

Integrity protections such as hashes or signatures can detect or prevent inconsistent state copies.

PR.IR-03 partial match
blocks

Resilience mechanisms often include state synchronization or replication protocols that enforce consistency.

PR.PS-06 partial match
blocks

SSDLC practices directly address design-level state-consistency flaws during development.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.14 Redundancy of information processing facilities partial match
degrades

Redundancy mechanisms can reduce divergence risk but do not guarantee consistency across independent state copies.

A.8.16 Monitoring activities partial match
finds

Monitoring can detect inconsistencies after they occur but does not prevent them by design.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
blocks

Secure SDLC practices can include consistency requirements yet do not specifically mandate distributed-state synchronization.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
blocks

A.8.26 only requires that security requirements (including resilience against attacks like injections) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself enforce, implement, or assure those requirements, so the distributed state inconsistency can still be introduced and exploited.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
blocks

Secure architecture principles can address distributed-state design yet leave the actual consistency mechanisms unspecified.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
removes

References