CVE-2024-21598
Juniper Junos 20.4 … 23.2
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2024-21598 is a high-severity Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input (CWE-1286) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 44th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-19246
Vulnerability Data
An Improper Validation of Syntactic Correctness of Input vulnerability in the Routing Protocol Daemon (rpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows a network-based, unauthenticated attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). If a BGP update…
more
is received over an established BGP session which contains a tunnel encapsulation attribute with a specifically malformed TLV, rpd will crash and restart. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS: * 20.4 versions 20.4R1 and later versions earlier than 20.4R3-S9; * 21.2 versions earlier than 21.2R3-S7; * 21.3 versions earlier than 21.3R3-S5; * 21.4 versions earlier than 21.4R3-S5; * 22.1 versions earlier than 22.1R3-S4; * 22.2 versions earlier than 22.2R3-S3; * 22.3 versions earlier than 22.3R3-S1; * 22.4 versions earlier than 22.4R3; * 23.2 versions earlier than 23.2R1-S2, 23.2R2; Junos OS Evolved: * 20.4-EVO versions 20.4R1-EVO and later versions earlier than 20.4R3-S9-EVO; * 21.2-EVO versions earlier than 21.2R3-S7-EVO; * 21.3-EVO versions earlier than 21.3R3-S5-EVO; * 21.4-EVO versions earlier than 21.4R3-S5-EVO; * 22.1-EVO versions earlier than 22.1R3-S4-EVO; * 22.2-EVO versions earlier than 22.2R3-S3-EVO; * 22.3-EVO versions earlier than 22.3R3-S1-EVO; * 22.4-EVO versions earlier than 22.4R3-EVO; * 23.2-EVO versions earlier than 23.2R1-S2-EVO, 23.2R2-EVO; This issue does not affect Juniper Networks * Junos OS versions earlier than 20.4R1; * Junos OS Evolved versions earlier than 20.4R1-EVO. This is a related but separate issue than the one described in JSA79095.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.1V1.4.2V2.1.1V2.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SI-10 requires validation of information inputs for correctness, directly stopping syntactic validation failures from being introduced or exploitable.
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 directly require syntactic input validation to prevent malformed data handling.
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 catches missing or incorrect syntax validation.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation to ensure syntactic correctness.
Application security requirements explicitly call for validation of input syntax.
Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of missing syntactic checks.
Secure coding standards directly require proper syntactic validation of all inputs.