CVE-2020-5912
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 BIG-IP versions 15.1.0-15.1.0.4, 15.0.0-15.0.1.3, 14.1.0-14.1.2.3, 13.1.0-13.1.3.3, 12.1.0-12.1.5.1, and 11.6.1-11.6.5.1, the restjavad process's dump command does not follow current best coding practices and may overwrite arbitrary files.
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 confidenceThe restjavad service in F5 BIG-IP contains a file overwrite vulnerability in its dump command. The command fails to properly validate file paths, allowing an authenticated attacker to potentially overwrite arbitrary files on the system. This could enable privilege escalation, configuration tampering, or code execution depending on what files are targeted.
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, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5>= 11.6.1, < 11.6.5.2>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5.2>= 13.1.0, < 13.1.3.4>= 14.1.0, < 14.1.2.5>= 15.0.0, < 15.0.1.4>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.0.5CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Confirm restjavad service is runningLog into the BIG-IP command line and run: tmsh show sys service restjavad or ps aux | grep restjavadAffected if The restjavad process is running and listening on the management port or internal IP addresses
-
Identify the installed BIG-IP versionRun command: tmsh show sys version or check /etc/default/versionAffected if Version output cannot be retrieved or shows a version string
-
Compare your version against affected rangesMatch the retrieved version number to these ranges: 11.6.1 to 11.6.5.1, 12.1.0 to 12.1.5.1, 13.1.0 to 13.1.3.3, 14.1.0 to 14.1.2.4, 15.0.0 to 15.0.1.3, or 15.1.0 to 15.1.0.4Affected if Your installed version falls within any of the listed vulnerable version ranges
-
Check if iControl REST API is accessibleAttempt to reach the REST API endpoint: curl -k https://<management-ip>/mgmt/tm/util/dump -u admin:<password>Affected if The API responds and accepts authenticated requests to the restjavad utility endpoints
-
Verify the restjavad dump command behaviorIf authenticated, send a POST request to /mgmt/tm/util/bash with a command that attempts to write to an unintended path; observe if path traversal is possibleAffected if The service allows path traversal in the dump or related utility commands
Your environment is affected if restjavad is running, the BIG-IP version falls within any of the vulnerable version ranges (11.6.1-11.6.5.1, 12.1.0-12.1.5.1, 13.1.0-13.1.3.3, 14.1.0-14.1.2.4, 15.0.0-15.0.1.3, or 15.1.0-15.1.0.4), and the iControl REST API is accessible to authenticated users.
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 data11.6.5.212.1.5.213.1.3.4
Apply the appropriate F5 patch or upgrade to a fixed BIG-IP version as specified in F5 advisory K44012020. This is a vendor-supplied patch addressing improper file handling in the restjavad process.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-5912 — 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-2020-5912 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