CVE-2022-35272
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 17.0.x before 17.0.0.1 and 16.1.x before 16.1.3.1, when source-port preserve-strict is configured on an HTTP Message Routing Framework (MRF) virtual server, undisclosed traffic may cause the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to produce a core file and the connection 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 · moderate confidenceIn F5 BIG-IP versions 17.0.x before 17.0.0.1 and 16.1.x before 16.1.3.1, when source-port preserve-strict is configured on an HTTP Message Routing Framework (MRF) virtual server, certain undisclosed traffic patterns can trigger the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to generate a core file and terminate the connection, 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>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.3.1= 17.0.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify the BIG-IP versionRun 'tmsh show sys version' or check the GUI System > Overview page to determine the installed BIG-IP versionAffected if Version is 16.1.0 through 16.1.3.0, or exactly 17.0.0 (versions before 16.1.0 are not affected, and versions 16.1.3.1 or later / 17.0.0.1 or later are patched)
-
Confirm the product moduleVerify the BIG-IP module in use is one of the affected products: Access Policy Manager, Advanced Firewall Manager, Analytics, Application Acceleration Manager, Application Security Manager, Domain Name System, Fraud Protection Service, or Global Traffic ManagerAffected if Any of these modules are running on an affected BIG-IP version
-
Locate HTTP MRF virtual serversList virtual servers configured with HTTP profile type by running 'tmsh list ltm virtual one-line' and reviewing output for MRF (Message Routing Framework) related configurationsAffected if Any virtual servers are configured using HTTP MRF (Message Routing Framework)
-
Check for source-port preserve-strict configurationFor each HTTP MRF virtual server, run 'tmsh list ltm virtual <virtual_name>' and examine the source-port setting; look specifically for 'source-port preserve-strict' in the configurationAffected if The virtual server has 'source-port preserve-strict' explicitly configured in the source-port settings
You are affected if your BIG-IP version is 16.1.0-16.1.3.0 or exactly 17.0.0, and you have an HTTP MRF virtual server configured with source-port preserve-strict enabled.
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.
dbcve · scoped16.1.3.1
Upgrade BIG-IP to version 17.0.0.1 or later, or 16.1.3.1 or later. Alternatively, until patching is possible, avoid using source-port preserve-strict configuration on HTTP MRF virtual servers.
BIG-IP 16.1.3.1 or later (16.1.x branch); BIG-IP 17.0.0.1 or later (17.0.x branch)
- 1. Identify all BIG-IP devices running affected versions (16.1.0 - 16.1.3.0 or 17.0.0)
- 2. Identify virtual servers with HTTP Message Routing Framework (MRF) that have 'source-port preserve-strict' configured
- 3. Back up the current BIG-IP configuration
- 4. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- 5. Upgrade BIG-IP 16.1.x systems to version 16.1.3.1 or later
- 6. Upgrade BIG-IP 17.0.0 systems to version 17.0.0.1 or later
- 7. After upgrade, verify virtual server configuration and test connectivity
- 8. Monitor TMM logs and core files to confirm the vulnerability is resolved
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,736.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-35272 — 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-2022-35272 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