CVE-2024-39555
Juniper Junos ≤ 21.4
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:A/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2024-39555 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 40th 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 SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-38081
Vulnerability Data
An Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in the Routing Protocol Daemon (RPD) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an attacker sending a specific malformed BGP update message to cause the session to reset, resulting in…
more
a Denial of Service (DoS). Continued receipt and processing of these malformed BGP update messages will create a sustained Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Upon receipt of a BGP update message over an established BGP session containing a specifically malformed tunnel encapsulation attribute, when segment routing is enabled, internal processing of the malformed attributes within the update results in improper parsing of remaining attributes, leading to session reset: BGP SEND Notification code 3 (Update Message Error) subcode 1 (invalid attribute list) Only systems with segment routing enabled are vulnerable to this issue. This issue affects eBGP and iBGP, in both IPv4 and IPv6 implementations, and requires a remote attacker to have at least one established BGP session. This issue affects: Junos OS: * All versions before 21.4R3-S8, * from 22.2 before 22.2R3-S4, * from 22.3 before 22.3R3-S3, * from 22.4 before 22.4R3-S3, * from 23.2 before 23.2R2-S1, * from 23.4 before 23.4R1-S2, 23.4R2. Junos OS Evolved: * All versions before 21.4R3-S8-EVO, * from 22.2-EVO before 22.2R3-S4-EVO, * from 22.3-EVO before 22.3R3-S3-EVO, * from 22.4-EVO before 22.4R3-S3-EVO, * from 23.2-EVO before 23.2R2-S1-EVO, * from 23.4-EVO before 23.4R1-S2-EVO, 23.4R2-EVO.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires the system to fail to a known safe state on specified failures, limiting the impact of unhandled exceptional conditions.
Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures triggered by indicated failures, structurally preventing unhandled or mishandled exceptional conditions.
Requires generation of appropriate error messages on exceptional conditions, directly enforcing correct handling rather than silent or incorrect behavior.
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 proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
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 correct handling of exceptional conditions.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.
Application security requirements explicitly include handling of error and exceptional conditions.