CVE-2025-60004VulnerabilityPublished 9 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-60004: Juniper Networks Junos OS · Unchecked Error Condition

Affects Juniper Networks Junos OSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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 9 Oct 2025
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 2026-10-26.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Juniper Networks Junos OS	Affected =24.2 =24.4	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade affected Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved devices to the fixed versions as soon as they become available from Juniper Networks. 2. Implement strict BGP session filtering to block unexpected or unauthorized BGP EVPN update messages, especially from external peers. 3. Monitor BGP sessions for unusual EVPN update traffic patterns that could indicate exploitation attempts. 4. Use network segmentation to isolate critical routing infrastructure and limit exposure to untrusted networks. 5. Employ redundancy and failover mechanisms in routing to minimize service disruption during rpd crashes. 6. Coordinate with upstream and downstream network providers to ensure consistent filtering and protection against malicious BGP EVPN updates. 7. Regularly review and update routing policies to restrict EVPN updates only to trusted peers. 8. Maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans to quickly recover from potential DoS events caused by this vulnerability.

Description

An Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions vulnerability in the routing protocol daemon (rpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an unauthenticated, network-based attacker to cause a Denial-Of-Service (DoS). When an affected system receives a specific BGP EVPN update message over an established BGP session, this causes an rpd crash and restart. A BGP EVPN configuration is not necessary to be vulnerable. If peers are not configured to send BGP EVPN updates to a vulnerable device, then this issue can't occur. This issue affects iBGP and eBGP, over IPv4 and IPv6. This issue affects: Junos OS: * 23.4 versions from 23.4R2-S3 before 23.4R2-S5, * 24.2 versions from 24.2R2 before 24.2R2-S1, * 24.4 versions before 24.4R1-S3, 24.4R2; Junos OS Evolved: * 23.4-EVO versions from 23.4R2-S2-EVO before 23.4R2-S5-EVO, * 24.2-EVO versions from 24.2R2-EVO before 24.2R2-S1-EVO, * 24.4-EVO versions before 24.4R1-S3-EVO, 24.4R2-EVO.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to network stability and availability, particularly for enterprises, ISPs, and data centers that rely on Juniper Networks Junos OS for routing. A successful exploitation could lead to repeated crashes of the routing daemon, causing intermittent or sustained denial-of-service conditions that disrupt internal and external network communications. This can affect business continuity, critical services, and data flow across interconnected networks. The impact is heightened in environments with dense BGP peering arrangements, including large telecom providers and cloud service operators. Since the vulnerability affects both IPv4 and IPv6 BGP sessions and does not require prior authentication, the attack surface is broad. Disruptions in routing can also have cascading effects on dependent services and applications, potentially leading to financial losses and reputational damage. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits following public disclosure.

CWE-754Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product does not check or incorrectly checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that are not expected to occur frequently during day to day operation of the product.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is expected.
Implementation
If using exception handling, catch and throw specific exceptions instead of overly-general exceptions (CWE-396, CWE-397). Catch and handle exceptions as locally as possible so that exceptions do not propagate too far up the call stack (CWE-705). Avoid unchecked or uncaught exceptions where feasible (CWE-248).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

supportportal.juniper.net/JSA103165 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Oct 2025, 16:53 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-754

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats