CVE-2020-1617

Score / Sévérité

7.5

HIGH

EPSS

0.22%V3

Vecteur

Network

Publié

2020-04-07 22:00 +00:00

Dernière modif.

2020-04-08 17:25 +00:00

Liens officiels

CVE.org

NVD

Alerte pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.

Gestion des alertes

Liste des Alertes

Alerte pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.

Critères appliqués l'envoi de l'alerte : par rapport à la dernière alerte envoyée + différences au niveau de CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Paramètres

Vous pouvez sécifier un titre qui sera récupéré dans les alertes qui seront envoyées.

Spécifiez ici un CVE ID comme CVE-2024-1234

Planificiations

Mois

Prochaine exécution calculée

Jour

Jour de la semaine

Heure

Minute

Date de création

Dernière exécution

Prochaine exécution

Fonctionnalité nécessitant une connexion

Cette fonctionnalité qui vous permet de recevoir des alertes, n'est active que lorsque vous êtes connecté à votre compte.

Descriptions

Junos OS: PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series using non-AFT architectures: A specific genuine packet inspected by sFlow will cause a reboot.

This issue occurs on Juniper Networks Junos OS devices which do not support Advanced Forwarding Interface (AFI) / Advanced Forwarding Toolkit (AFT). Devices using AFI and AFT are not exploitable to this issue. An improper initialization of memory in the packet forwarding architecture in Juniper Networks Junos OS non-AFI/AFT platforms which may lead to a Denial of Service (DoS) vulnerability being exploited when a genuine packet is received and inspected by non-AFT/AFI sFlow and when the device is also configured with firewall policers. This first genuine packet received and inspected by sampled flow (sFlow) through a specific firewall policer will cause the device to reboot. After the reboot has completed, if the device receives and sFlow inspects another genuine packet seen through a specific firewall policer, the device will generate a core file and reboot. Continued inspection of these genuine packets will create an extended Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Depending on the method for service restoration, e.g. hard boot or soft reboot, a core file may or may not be generated the next time the packet is received and inspected by sFlow. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S9, 17.4R3 on PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S9 on PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D12, 18.2X75-D30 on PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3 on PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R3 on PTX1000 and PTX10000 Series, QFX10000 Series. This issue is not applicable to Junos OS versions before 17.4R1. This issue is not applicable to Junos OS Evolved or Junos OS with Advanced Forwarding Toolkit (AFT) forwarding implementations which use a different implementation of sFlow. The following example information is unrelated to this issue and is provided solely to assist you with determining if you have AFT or not. Example: A Junos OS device which supports the use of EVPN signaled VPWS with Flexible Cross Connect uses the AFT implementation. Since this configuration requires support and use of the AFT implementation to support this configuration, the device is not vulnerable to this issue as the sFlow implementation is different using the AFT architecture. For further details about AFT visit the AFI / AFT are in the links below. If you are uncertain if you use the AFI/AFT implementation or not, there are configuration examples in the links below which you may use to determine if you are vulnerable to this issue or not. If the commands work, you are. If not, you are not. You may also use the Feature Explorer to determine if AFI/AFT is supported or not. If you are still uncertain, please contact your support resources.

Solutions

The following software releases have been updated to resolve this specific issue: 17.4R2-S9, 17.4R3;18.2X75-D12, 18.2X75-D30, 18.1R3-S9, 18.2R3, 18.3R3, 18.4R1, and all subsequent releases.

Informations

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID	Nom de la faiblesse	Source
CWE-665	Improper Initialization The product does not initialize or incorrectly initializes a resource, which might leave the resource in an unexpected state when it is accessed or used.

Metrics

Metric	Score	Sévérité	CVSS Vecteur	Source
V3.1	7.5	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H More informations Base: Exploitabilty Metrics The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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 This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. None The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope Metrics The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. 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. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a 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). Temporal Metrics The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.
V2	7.8		AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C	[email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

EPSS Score

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

EPSS Percentile

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.

EPSS First.org