CVE-2022-22169

Score / Gravité

5.9

Moyen

EPSS

0.1%V3

Vecteur

Network

Publié

2022-01-19
00h21 +00:00

Modifié

2024-09-17
00h35 +00:00

Liens officiels

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.

Gestion des notifications

Liste des Notifications

Notifications 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 spécifier un titre qui sera récupéré dans les alertes qui seront envoyées.

Spécifiez ici un CVE ID comme CVE-2025-1234

Planifications

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 du CVE

Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved: OSPFv3 session might go into INIT state upon receipt of multiple crafted packets from a trusted neighbor device.

An Improper Initialization vulnerability in the routing protocol daemon (rpd) of Juniper Networks Junos OS and Junos OS Evolved allows an attacker who sends specific packets in certain orders and at specific timings to force OSPFv3 to unexpectedly enter graceful-restart (GR helper mode) even though there is not any Grace-LSA received in OSPFv3 causing a Denial of Service (DoS). Unexpectedly entering GR helper mode might cause the OSPFv3 neighbor adjacency formed on this interface to be stuck in the "INIT" state which can be observed by issuing the following command: user@device> show ospf3 neighbor ID Interface State xx.xx.xx.xx ae100.0 Init <<<<<<<<<< An indicator of compromise can be seen in log files when traceoptions for OSPFv3 are enabled before the issue occurs. These logfile messages are as follows: OSPF restart signaling: Received hello with LR bit set from nbr ip=xx::xx id=xx.xx.xx.xx. Set oob-resync capabilty 1. OSPF Restart Signaling: Start helper mode for nbr ip xx::xx id xx.xx.xx.xx OSPF restart signaling: abort helper mode for nbr ip=xx::xx id=xx.xx.xx.xx OSPF neighbor xx::xx (realm ipv6-unicast area xx.xx.xx.xx) state changed from Full to Init due to 1WayRcvd (event reason: neighbor is in one-way mode) (nbr helped: 0) This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS. 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S11; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R3-S6; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R2-S9, 18.4R3-S10; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R2-S3, 19.1R3-S7; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S7, 19.2R3-S4; 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R2-S7, 19.3R3-S4; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R3-S6; 20.1 versions prior to 20.1R3-S1; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R3-S3; 20.3 versions prior to 20.3R3-S1; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R2-S2, 20.4R3; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R1-S1, 21.2R2. This issue does not affect any version of Juniper Networks Junos OS 12.3. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS Evolved all versions prior to 21.2R2-EVO.

Solutions du CVE

The following software releases have been updated to resolve this specific issue: Junos OS: 15.1R7-S11, 18.3R3-S6, 18.4R2-S9, 18.4R3-S10, 19.1R2-S3, 19.1R3-S7, 19.2R1-S7, 19.2R3-S4, 19.3R2-S7, 19.3R3-S4, 19.4R3-S6, 20.1R3-S1, 20.2R3-S3, 20.3R3-S1, 20.4R2-S2, 20.4R3, 21.1R3, 21.2R1-S1, 21.2R2, 21.3R1, and all subsequent releases. Junos OS Evolved: 21.2R2-EVO, 21.3R1-EVO, and all subsequent releases.

Informations du CVE

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.

Métriques

Métriques	Score	Gravité	CVSS Vecteur	Source
V3.1	5.9	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. 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	4.3		AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P	nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

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

Score EPSS

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.

Percentile EPSS

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