Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-30659

Juniper Junos 21.4 … 24.2

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:A/V:X/RE:M/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0040 33th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-30659 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency (CWE-130) vulnerability in Juniper Junos. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

An Improper Handling of Length Parameter Inconsistency vulnerability in the Packet Forwarding Engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX Series allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause a Denial-of-Service (DoS). When a device configured for Secure Vector Routing…

more

(SVR) receives a specifically malformed packet the PFE will crash and restart. This issue affects Junos OS on SRX Series: * All 21.4 versions, * 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-S4, * 24.2 versions before 24.2R2. This issue does not affect versions before 21.4.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-21920Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-57021Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-6549Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-21917Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-59968Same product: Juniper Srx1500
CVE-2026-57023Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-21906Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2026-21914Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2025-52949Same product: Juniper Junos
CVE-2023-28964Same product: Juniper Junos

Affected Assets

juniper
junos
21.4, 22.2, 22.4, 23.2, 23.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.5.5
  • V4.2.1
  • V4.2.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover length-parameter inconsistencies through targeted parsing tests.

Input validation enforces correct length-to-data consistency checks on parsed messages before processing.

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 length validation and input sanitization during coding and review.

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 length-inconsistency vulnerabilities before deployment.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and length checks that directly address inconsistent length fields.

prevents

Application security requirements include explicit rules for handling message lengths and data structures.

prevents

Secure architecture principles require robust parsing and bounds checking to prevent length-related flaws.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly prohibit improper length handling and enforce defensive parsing practices.

References