CVE-2017-6148
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 · uneditedResponses to SOCKS proxy requests made through F5 BIG-IP version 13.0.0, 12.0.0-12.1.3.1, 11.6.1-11.6.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.5 may cause a disruption of services provided by TMM. The data plane is impacted and exposed only when a SOCKS proxy profile is attached to a Virtual Server. The control plane is not impacted by this vulnerability.
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 · high confidenceF5 BIG-IP contains a vulnerability in the TMM (Traffic Management Microkernel) data plane where specially crafted responses to SOCKS proxy requests can cause TMM to restart or crash, resulting in disruption of services. The vulnerability is only exposed when a SOCKS proxy profile is attached to a Virtual Server.
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>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0>= 11.5.1, <= 11.5.5>= 11.6.1, <= 11.6.2>= 12.0.0, <= 12.1.3= 13.0.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/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 the installed BIG-IP versionRun 'tmsh show sys version' or 'show sys version' from the administrative interface to retrieve the exact version number.Affected if The version falls within 11.5.1-11.5.5, 11.6.1-11.6.2, 12.0.0-12.1.3, or 13.0.0.
-
Identify SOCKS proxy profiles configuredRun 'tmsh list ltm profile socks' to list all SOCKS proxy profiles defined on the system.Affected if Any SOCKS proxy profiles exist on the system.
-
Check Virtual Servers with SOCKS profiles attachedRun 'tmsh list ltm virtual' and examine each Virtual Server configuration for a 'socks-profile' reference in the profile section.Affected if A Virtual Server references a SOCKS proxy profile in its configuration.
-
Confirm TMM exposureReview the output from the previous step to identify which specific Virtual Servers have SOCKS proxy profiles attached.Affected if At least one Virtual Server has a SOCKS proxy profile enabled.
You are affected if the BIG-IP version is within the vulnerable ranges AND a SOCKS proxy profile is attached to any Virtual Server.
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 F5 BIG-IP to a patched version. If immediate patching is not possible, consider removing SOCKS proxy profiles from Virtual Servers as a compensating control until the upgrade can be performed.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6148 — 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-2017-6148 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