CVE-2026-21911
Juniper Junos Os Evolved ≤ 21.4
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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:C/RE:M/U:AmberSummary
CVE-2026-21911 is a high-severity Incorrect Calculation (CWE-682) vulnerability in Juniper Junos Os Evolved. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 13th 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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-2699
Vulnerability Data
An Incorrect Calculation vulnerability in the Layer 2 Control Protocol Daemon (l2cpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated network-adjacent attacker flapping the management interface to cause the learning of new MACs over label-switched interfaces (LSI) to stop…
more
while generating a flood of logs, resulting in high CPU usage. When the issue is seen, the following log message will be generated: op:1 flag:0x6 mac:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx bd:2 ifl:13302 reason:0(REASON_NONE) i-op:6(INTRNL_OP_HW_FORCE_DELETE) status:10 lstatus:10 err:26(GETIFBD_VALIDATE_FAILED) err-reason 4(IFBD_VALIDATE_FAIL_EPOCH_MISMATCH) hw_wr:0x4 ctxsync:0 fwdsync:0 rtt-id:51 p_ifl:0 fwd_nh:0 svlbnh:0 event:- smask:0x100000000 dmask:0x0 mplsmask 0x1 act:0x5800 extf:0x0 pfe-id 0 hw-notif-ifl 13302 programmed-ifl 4294967295 pseudo-vtep underlay-ifl-idx 0 stack:GET_MAC, ALLOCATE_MAC, GET_IFL, GET_IFF, GET_IFBD, STOP, This issue affects Junos OS Evolved: * all versions before 21.4R3-S7-EVO, * from 22.2 before 22.2R3-S4-EVO, * from 22.3 before 22.3R3-S3-EVO, * from 22.4 before 22.4R3-S2-EVO, * from 23.2 before 23.2R2-S1-EVO, * from 23.4 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
—
—
—
V15.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly exercises calculations and can discover incorrect or unintended results used in security decisions.
Requiring documented development processes and standards can enforce coding rules and tool usage that reduce introduction of calculation errors.
Engineering principles applied during design and implementation can require verified algorithms and safe arithmetic that structurally avoid incorrect calculation results.
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 directly prevent incorrect calculations via reviews, testing, and verification in security-critical code.
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 can detect calculation flaws before deployment.
Secure development lifecycle mandates verification steps that catch incorrect calculations before they reach production.
Application security requirements can explicitly call for numeric accuracy and bounds checking.
Secure architecture principles include input validation and safe arithmetic design that reduce calculation errors.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit unsafe arithmetic and require defensive checks against incorrect results.