Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-30409

Juniper Junos 22.1

Published
12 April 2024
Modified
06 February 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 6.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0048 39th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-30409 is a medium-severity Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions (CWE-754) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 39th 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

Vulnerability Data

An Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in telemetry processing of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows a network-based authenticated attacker to cause the forwarding information base telemetry daemon (fibtd) to crash, leading to a…

more

limited Denial of Service. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS: * from 22.1 before 22.1R1-S2, 22.1R2. Junos OS Evolved: * from 22.1 before 22.1R1-S2-EVO, 22.1R2-EVO.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-60004Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-47507Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-60011Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-30402Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-33801Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-30655Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-47499Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-59960Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-21597Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-21614Same product: Juniper Junos

Affected Assets

juniper
junos
22.1
juniper
junos os evolved
22.1

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 7 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

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.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires detection and response to audit logging failures as an unusual or exceptional condition.

addresses: CWE-754

Implements detection of unusual or exceptional conditions followed by safe mode entry, reducing the window for exploitation of unchecked conditions.

addresses: CWE-754

Training ensures users perform required checks for unusual or exceptional conditions as part of contingency roles, limiting attacker leverage from skipped validations.

addresses: CWE-754

IR testing directly validates checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that could indicate security incidents.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires ongoing monitoring of organization-defined metrics and analysis, enabling checks for unusual or exceptional conditions.

addresses: CWE-754

Security testing routinely checks for unusual or exceptional inputs/conditions, identifying missing validation steps that flaw remediation then resolves.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires detection of unusual conditions followed by a controlled transition to the defined failure state.

addresses: CWE-754

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure development practices directly require proper checks and handling for exceptional conditions throughout the SDLC.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of software and environments can detect adverse events triggered by unhandled exceptional conditions.

PR.PS-04 partial match
prevents

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.

detects

Security testing in development and acceptance verifies handling of error and exceptional conditions.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
detects

Logging can record unhandled exceptions but does not prevent the weakness itself.

detects

Monitoring may detect symptoms of unhandled conditions but does not eliminate the root weakness.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates exception handling and input validation that directly prevent missing checks for unusual conditions.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for handling of exceptional conditions and error paths.

prevents

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

References