CVE-2023-28965
Juniper Junos ≤ 19.3
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-28965 is a medium-severity Improper Check or Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-703) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Service Stop (T1489); ranked at the 46th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-32583
Vulnerability Data
An Improper Check or Handling of Exceptional Conditions within the storm control feature of Juniper Networks Junos OS allows an attacker sending a high rate of traffic to cause a Denial of Service. Continued receipt and processing of these packets…
more
will create a sustained Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Storm control monitors the level of applicable incoming traffic and compares it with the level specified. If the combined level of the applicable traffic exceeds the specified level, the switch drops packets for the controlled traffic types. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on QFX10002: All versions prior to 19.3R3-S7; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R3-S11; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R3-S6; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S5; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S4; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S3; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
—
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Implements explicit check and handling for the exceptional condition of audit logging process failure.
Provides a defined response to detected conditions by restricting operation, ensuring exceptional conditions are handled rather than ignored or mishandled.
Contingency training equips users with defined procedures to check and respond to exceptional conditions during disruptions, reducing exploitation of mishandled errors.
Performing IR tests ensures exceptional conditions are properly checked and handled to enable effective response.
Testing and evaluation exercises error paths and exceptional conditions, surfacing improper handling that is then remediated through the defined process.
Mandates explicit, predictable handling of exceptional conditions rather than undefined continuation.
Requires systematic prediction and handling of failure conditions, reducing the impact of unhandled exceptional states.
The required verification process supplies the missing checks for exceptional conditions affecting security functions.
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.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly require anticipating and correctly handling exceptional conditions during design and coding.
Runtime monitoring of software and environments can detect adverse events triggered by unhandled exceptional conditions.
Generating logs of exceptions and errors enables detection of improper handling of unusual conditions.
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.
Security testing in development and acceptance verifies handling of error and exceptional conditions.
Logging can record unhandled exceptions but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Monitoring may detect symptoms of unhandled conditions but does not eliminate the root weakness.
Secure development life cycle mandates exception handling and input validation that directly prevent missing checks for unusual conditions.
Application security requirements explicitly call for handling of exceptional conditions and error paths.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require robust error and exception handling mechanisms.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248574 YUM must be configured to prevent the installation of patches, service packs, device drivers, or OL 8 system components that have not been digitally signed using a certificate that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-754
- V-248575 OL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-754
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-754