CVE-2025-52985
Juniper Junos Os Evolved 23.2 … 24.4
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-52985 is a medium-severity Use of Incorrect Operator (CWE-480) vulnerability in Juniper Junos Os Evolved. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 16th 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) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-21145
Vulnerability Data
A Use of Incorrect Operator vulnerability in the Routing Engine firewall of Juniper Networks Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to bypass security restrictions. When a firewall filter which is applied to the lo0 or re:mgmt interface references…
more
a prefix list with 'from prefix-list', and that prefix list contains more than 10 entries, the prefix list doesn't match and packets destined to or from the local device are not filtered. This issue affects firewall filters applied to the re:mgmt interfaces as input and output, but only affects firewall filters applied to the lo0 interface as output. This issue is applicable to IPv4 and IPv6 as a prefix list can contain IPv4 and IPv6 prefixes. This issue affects Junos OS Evolved: * 23.2R2-S3-EVO versions before 23.2R2-S4-EVO, * 23.4R2-S3-EVO versions before 23.4R2-S5-EVO, * 24.2R2-EVO versions before 24.2R2-S1-EVO, * 24.4-EVO versions before 24.4R1-S3-EVO, 24.4R2-EVO. This issue doesn't affect Junos OS Evolved versions before 23.2R1-EVO.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation will surface logic errors caused by an incorrect operator during code review or test execution.
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 (reviews, static analysis, testing) directly catch incorrect-operator bugs while the weakness is only one narrow class of coding defect the control addresses.
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 and code review can catch operator errors before release.
Secure coding standards and peer review directly prevent accidental use of incorrect operators.
Change management processes may include code review gates that incidentally catch operator mistakes.