CVE-2024-21603
Juniper Junos 20.4 … 22.3
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-21603 is a medium-severity Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions (CWE-754) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 40th 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-2024-19251
Vulnerability Data
An Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in the kernel of Juniper Network Junos OS on MX Series allows a network based attacker with low privileges to cause a denial of service. If a scaled configuration for Source…
more
class usage (SCU) / destination class usage (DCU) (more than 10 route classes) is present and the SCU/DCU statistics are gathered by executing specific SNMP requests or CLI commands, a 'vmcore' for the RE kernel will be seen which leads to a device restart. Continued exploitation of this issue will lead to a sustained DoS. This issue only affects MX Series devices with MPC10, MPC11 or LC9600, and MX304. No other MX Series devices are affected. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS: * All versions earlier than 20.4R3-S9; * 21.2 versions earlier than 21.2R3-S6; * 21.3 versions earlier than 21.3R3-S5; * 21.4 versions earlier than 21.4R3; * 22.1 versions earlier than 22.1R3; * 22.2 versions earlier than 22.2R2; * 22.3 versions earlier than 22.3R2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
The vulnerability allows a low-privileged network-based attacker to trigger a kernel crash and device restart (vmcore) via specific SNMP requests or CLI commands on affected Junos OS MX Series devices, enabling endpoint denial of service through application/system exploitation and system shutdown/reboot for sustained DoS.
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.
Requires detection and response to audit logging failures as an unusual or exceptional condition.
Implements detection of unusual or exceptional conditions followed by safe mode entry, reducing the window for exploitation of unchecked conditions.
Training ensures users perform required checks for unusual or exceptional conditions as part of contingency roles, limiting attacker leverage from skipped validations.
IR testing directly validates checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that could indicate security incidents.
Requires ongoing monitoring of organization-defined metrics and analysis, enabling checks for unusual or exceptional conditions.
Security testing routinely checks for unusual or exceptional inputs/conditions, identifying missing validation steps that flaw remediation then resolves.
Requires detection of unusual conditions followed by a controlled transition to the defined failure state.
MTTF determination forces explicit checks for conditions that precede predictable component failure.
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 development practices directly require proper checks and handling for exceptional conditions throughout the SDLC.
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 reduce the attack surface for weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Derived transitively via CVE→CWE→STIG over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248573 The OL 8 file integrity tool must notify the system administrator (SA) when changes to the baseline configuration or anomalies in the operation of any security functions are discovered within an organizationally defined frequency. via 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. via CWE-754
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. via CWE-754