VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-60003: Juniper Networks Junos OS · Buffer Over-read

Affects Juniper Networks Junos OSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High · fixed in 24.4R2 : patch Juniper Networks Junos OS soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 35% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 24.4R2, 24.2R2-S2, 23.4R2-S6 +7

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Juniper NetworksJunos OS	Affected <22.4R3-S8 >=23.2 <23.2R2-S5 >=23.4 <23.4R2-S6 >=24.2 <24.2R2-S2 >=24.4 <24.4R2	Fixed in 24.4R2 24.2R2-S2 23.4R2-S6 23.2R2-S5 22.4R3-S8
Juniper NetworksJunos OS Evolved	Affected <22.4R3-S8-EVO >=23.2 <23.2R2-S5-EVO >=23.4 <23.4R2-S6-EVO >=24.2 <24.2R2-S2-EVO >=24.4 <24.4R2-EVO	Fixed in 24.4R2-EVO 24.2R2-S2-EVO 23.4R2-S6-EVO 23.2R2-S5-EVO 22.4R3-S8-EVO

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade affected Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved devices to the fixed versions: 22.4R3-S8 or later, 23.2R2-S5 or later, 23.4R2-S6 or later, 24.2R2-S2 or later, and 24.4R2 or later as applicable. 2. Audit BGP configurations to identify sessions where 4-byte AS support is disabled (disable-4byte-as enabled) and evaluate the necessity of this setting; re-enable 4-byte AS support if possible. 3. Use the command 'show bgp neighbor <IP address> | match "4 byte AS"' to verify peer capabilities and identify vulnerable sessions. 4. Implement network segmentation and filtering to restrict BGP update messages from untrusted or external peers, reducing exposure to crafted malicious updates. 5. Monitor routing daemon stability and logs for unexpected rpd crashes or restarts that may indicate exploitation attempts. 6. Employ anomaly detection systems to identify unusual BGP update patterns that could signal an attack. 7. Coordinate with upstream and downstream BGP peers to ensure consistent 4-byte AS support and secure BGP session configurations. 8. Maintain an incident response plan to quickly address routing disruptions caused by this vulnerability. These steps go beyond generic patching by focusing on configuration hygiene, proactive monitoring, and peer coordination.

Description

CVE-2025-60003 is a high-severity buffer over-read vulnerability in the routing protocol daemon (rpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit this by sending a crafted BGP update containing specific optional transitive attributes over an established peering session, causing rpd to crash and restart, resulting in a denial-of-service (DoS). This vulnerability only triggers if one or both BGP peers are non-4-byte-AS capable, which is not the default behavior unless explicitly disabled. It affects multiple versions of Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved prior to certain patch releases. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 7.5, indicating high severity, with no known exploits in the wild currently. European organizations using affected Juniper routing devices with BGP peering configurations that disable 4-byte AS support are at risk. Mitigation requires upgrading to fixed Junos OS versions and verifying BGP peer capabilities to avoid triggering the flaw.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to network availability, particularly for ISPs, telecom providers, and large enterprises relying on Juniper routing infrastructure for BGP peering. A successful exploit can cause routing daemon crashes and restarts, leading to temporary loss of routing information, potential traffic disruption, and degraded network performance. This can impact critical services, including internet connectivity, cloud access, and inter-site communications. Organizations with legacy BGP configurations that disable 4-byte AS support are especially vulnerable. Given the importance of stable routing in telecommunications and enterprise networks across Europe, exploitation could disrupt business operations and service delivery. Although no confidentiality or integrity impact is noted, the availability impact alone can have cascading effects on dependent services and SLAs. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits targeting this vulnerability. The widespread use of Juniper devices in European network infrastructure increases the potential attack surface.

CWE-126Buffer Over-read (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product reads from a buffer using buffer access mechanisms such as indexes or pointers that reference memory locations after the targeted buffer.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 22 Jan 2026, 21:32 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-126

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats