dbcve.org
Big Ip Access Policy ManagerApplication · F5

CVE-2022-29491

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-05-05
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
On F5 BIG-IP LTM, Advanced WAF, ASM, or APM 16.1.x versions prior to 16.1.2.2, 15.1.x versions prior to 15.1.5, 14.1.x versions prior to 14.1.4.6, and all versions of 13.1.x, 12.1.x, and 11.6.x, when a virtual server is configured with HTTP, TCP on one side (client/server), and DTLS on the other (server/client), undisclosed requests can cause the TMM process to terminate. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated

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 confidence

This is a denial-of-service vulnerability in F5 BIG-IP where a virtual server configured with asymmetric protocol termination (HTTP or TCP on client side, DTLS on server side, or vice versa) can crash the TMM (Traffic Management Module) process when receiving specific undisclosed requests. This causes the traffic management plane to fail, resulting in service disruption.

MitigationUpgrade to fixed versions (16.1.2.2, 15.1.5, or 14.1.4.6) or reconfigure virtual servers to avoid mixed HTTP/TCP + DTLS protocol termination. Note that versions 13.1.x, 12.1.x, and 11.6.x are end-of-support and require upgrade.

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
Big Ip Access Policy ManagerApplication
Affected:= 11.6.1= 11.6.2= 11.6.3= 11.6.4= 11.6.5= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 12.1.3= 12.1.4= 12.1.5= 12.1.6
Big Ip Advanced Web Application FirewallApplication
Affected:= 11.6.1= 11.6.2= 11.6.3= 11.6.4= 11.6.5= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 12.1.3= 12.1.4= 12.1.5= 12.1.6
Big Ip Application Security ManagerApplication
Affected:= 11.6.1= 11.6.2= 11.6.3= 11.6.4= 11.6.5= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 12.1.3= 12.1.4= 12.1.5= 12.1.6
Big Ip Local Traffic ManagerApplication
Affected:= 11.6.1= 11.6.2= 11.6.3= 11.6.4= 11.6.5= 12.1.0= 12.1.1= 12.1.2= 12.1.3= 12.1.4= 12.1.5= 12.1.6

CVSS 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:3.1/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the BIG-IP software version
    Run 'tmsh show /sys version' or check System > Software Management > Install Software in the GUI. Compare the displayed version against the affected range (11.6.1 through 12.1.6).
    Affected if The installed version is 11.6.1, 11.6.2, 11.6.3, 11.6.4, 11.6.5, 12.1.0, 12.1.1, 12.1.2, 12.1.3, 12.1.4, 12.1.5, or 12.1.6.
  2. Locate virtual servers using DTLS profiles
    Run 'tmsh list /ltm virtual all profiles' and look for any virtual server that includes a DTLS profile in its profile list.
    Affected if Any virtual server has a DTLS profile assigned.
  3. Check for asymmetric protocol termination configuration
    For each virtual server with a DTLS profile, examine both the client-side and server-side profile configurations using 'tmsh list /ltm virtual <virtual_name>'. Specifically look for whether the virtual server uses HTTP or TCP profiles on one side while using DTLS on the other, or vice versa.
    Affected if A virtual server is configured with asymmetric protocol termination such as HTTP/TCP on the client side with DTLS on the server side, or DTLS on the client side with HTTP/TCP on the server side.
  4. Verify if mixed protocol profiles are in use
    Examine the virtual server profile hierarchy. Run 'tmsh list /ltm virtual <name> profiles' and check whether the profile chain contains both non-DTLS profiles (http, tcp) and DTLS profiles simultaneously.
    Affected if The virtual server profile configuration combines HTTP or TCP profiles with DTLS profiles in the same virtual server.

You are affected if your BIG-IP runs version 11.6.1 through 12.1.6 AND you have virtual servers configured with asymmetric protocol termination using DTLS alongside HTTP or TCP profiles.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to fixed versions (16.1.2.2, 15.1.5, or 14.1.4.6) or reconfigure virtual servers to avoid mixed HTTP/TCP + DTLS protocol termination. Note that versions 13.1.x, 12.1.x, and 11.6.x are end-of-support and require upgrade.

Recommended fix High confidence

Upgrade to one of: BIG-IP 16.1.2.2+, 15.1.5+, or 14.1.4.6+ (14.1.x or 15.1.x recommended for longer support window)

  1. 1. Identify all BIG-IP devices running affected versions (11.6.1-11.6.4) in your environment
  2. 2. Check the F5 End of Technical Support (EoTS) policy - version 11.6.x is EoTS as of February 2023, meaning no further patches will be released
  3. 3. Plan an upgrade to a supported version branch: 16.1.2.2 or later, 15.1.5 or later, or 14.1.4.6 or later
  4. 4. Before upgrading, review the current virtual server configurations for mixed HTTP/TCP and DTLS settings that trigger the vulnerability
  5. 5. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade process
  6. 6. Perform a backup of the BIG-IP configuration
  7. 7. Upgrade the BIG-IP software to the chosen fixed version
  8. 8. Verify the TMM process remains stable after upgrade
Caveat Upgrading major versions (11.6 to 14/15/16) may require configuration adjustments and could introduce compatibility changes with existing policies and profiles; thorough testing in staging recommended

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Big Ip Access Policy Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-29491 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-29491 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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