On QFX5000 Series and EX4600 switches, a high rate of Ethernet pause frames or an ARP packet storm received on the management interface (fxp0) can cause egress interface congestion, resulting in routing protocol packet drops, such as BGP, leading to peering flaps. The following log message may also be displayed: fpc0 dcbcm_check_stuck_buffers: Buffers are stuck on queue 7 of port 45 This issue only affects the QFX5000 Series products (QFX5100, QFX5110, QFX5200, QFX5210) and the EX4600 switch. No other platforms are affected by this issue. Affected releases are Juniper Networks Junos OS: 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D47 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7, 15.1R8 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D233 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R3 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S9, 17.1R3 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S6, 17.2R3 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 17.2X75 versions prior to 17.2X75-D42 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R2 on QFX5000 Series and EX4600.
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource, thereby enabling an actor to influence the amount of resources consumed, eventually leading to the exhaustion of available resources.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53 (including) | 14.1x53 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d10 (including) | 14.1x53-d10 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d121 (including) | 14.1x53-d121 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d15 (including) | 14.1x53-d15 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d16 (including) | 14.1x53-d16 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d25 (including) | 14.1x53-d25 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d26 (including) | 14.1x53-d26 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d27 (including) | 14.1x53-d27 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d30 (including) | 14.1x53-d30 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d35 (including) | 14.1x53-d35 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d40 (including) | 14.1x53-d40 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d42 (including) | 14.1x53-d42 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d43 (including) | 14.1x53-d43 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d44 (including) | 14.1x53-d44 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d45 (including) | 14.1x53-d45 (including) |
| Junos | Juniper | 14.1x53-d46 (including) | 14.1x53-d46 (including) |
Limited resources include memory, file system storage, database connection pool entries, and CPU. If an attacker can trigger the allocation of these limited resources, but the number or size of the resources is not controlled, then the attacker could cause a denial of service that consumes all available resources. This would prevent valid users from accessing the product, and it could potentially have an impact on the surrounding environment. For example, a memory exhaustion attack against an application could slow down the application as well as its host operating system. There are at least three distinct scenarios which can commonly lead to resource exhaustion:
Resource exhaustion problems are often result due to an incorrect implementation of the following situations:
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:
The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.
The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.