Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-30658

Juniper Junos ≤ 21.2

Published
09 April 2025
Modified
23 January 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 8.7
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: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:Y/R:U/V:X/RE:M/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0040 33th percentile
Risk Priority 44 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-30658 is a high-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 33th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime vulnerability in the Anti-Virus processing of Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX Series allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). On all SRX platforms with Anti-Virus enabled, if a…

more

server sends specific content in the HTTP body of a response to a client request, these packets are queued by Anti-Virus processing in Juniper Buffers (jbufs) which are never released. When these jbufs are exhausted, the device stops forwarding all transit traffic. A jbuf memory leak can be noticed from the following logs: (<node>.)<fpc> Warning: jbuf pool id <#> utilization level (<current level>%) is above <threshold>%! To recover from this issue, the affected device needs to be manually rebooted to free the leaked jbufs. This issue affects Junos OS on SRX Series: * all versions before 21.2R3-S9, * 21.4 versions before 21.4R3-S10, * 22.2 versions before 22.2R3-S6, * 22.4 versions before 22.4R3-S6, * 23.2 versions before 23.2R2-S3, * 23.4 versions before 23.4R2-S3, * 24.2 versions before 24.2R2.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.003 Application Exhaustion Flood Impact
Adversaries may target resource intensive features of applications to cause a denial of service (DoS), denying availability to those applications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-21609Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2023-22417Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-33790Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-30645Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-21906Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-21914Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2023-22395Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-21599Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-33780Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2024-21611Same product: Juniper Junos

Affected Assets

juniper
junos
21.2, 21.4, 22.2, 22.4, 23.2 · ≤ 21.2

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.

Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.

Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.

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 SDLC practices directly enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.

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.

finds

Security testing in development can detect unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.

finds

Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.

References