CVE-2017-6137
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn F5 BIG-IP LTM, AAM, AFM, Analytics, APM, ASM, DNS, Edge Gateway, GTM, Link Controller, PEM, PSM, WebAccelerator, and WebSafe 11.6.1 HF1, 12.0.0 HF3, 12.0.0 HF4, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.2, undisclosed traffic patterns received while software SYN cookie protection is engaged may cause a disruption of service to the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) on specific platforms and configurations.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceIn affected F5 BIG-IP products (11.6.1 HF1, 12.0.0-12.0.0 HF4, 12.1.0-12.1.2), specific undisclosed traffic patterns received while software-based SYN cookie protection is enabled can cause disruption or unavailability of the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) on certain platforms and configurations, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 12.0.0= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 11.6.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check BIG-IP versionRun 'tmsh show /sys version' or 'tmsh list /sys version' to display the installed software versionAffected if The version displayed is 11.6.1, 12.0.0, 12.0.0 HF1-HF4, 12.1.0, 12.1.1, or 12.1.2
-
Identify TCP profiles in useRun 'tmsh list /ltm profile tcp' to list all configured TCP profiles on the systemAffected if One or more TCP profiles exist on the system
-
Check for software-based SYN cookie protectionRun 'tmsh list /ltm profile tcp <profile_name>' for each TCP profile and look for the 'syn-cookie-enabled' setting. Software-based SYN cookies are enabled when 'syn-cookie-enabled' is set to 'enabled' and hardware SYN cookies are not in useAffected if Any TCP profile has syn-cookie-enabled set to 'enabled' and the profile is associated with virtual servers processing traffic
-
Verify affected virtual serversRun 'tmsh list /ltm virtual' to identify virtual servers using the affected TCP profiles. Check which virtual servers reference the TCP profiles with SYN cookies enabledAffected if Virtual servers are using TCP profiles with software-based SYN cookie protection enabled
You are affected if your BIG-IP runs version 11.6.1, 12.0.0-12.0.0 HF4, or 12.1.0-12.1.2 AND has software-based SYN cookie protection enabled on any TCP profile used by active virtual servers.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to a F5-supported version that addresses this vulnerability, or consider switching from software-based SYN cookie protection to hardware-based SYN cookies if upgrading is not immediately feasible.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,168.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6137 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-6137 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data