CVE-2023-40534
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 · uneditedWhen a client-side HTTP/2 profile and the HTTP MRF Router option are enabled for a virtual server, and an iRule using the HTTP_REQUEST event or Local Traffic Policy are associated with the virtual server, undisclosed requests can cause TMM 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 confidenceA denial of service vulnerability in F5 BIG-IP where the combination of client-side HTTP/2 profile, HTTP MRF Router option, and an iRule with HTTP_REQUEST event or Local Traffic Policy on a virtual server allows undisclosed requests to crash the TMM (Traffic Management Microkernel).
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, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.4.1= 17.1.0CVSS 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:3.1/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check the installed BIG-IP versionRun 'tmsh show sys version' or 'bigpipe version' from the command line. Alternatively, check the BIG-IP GUI under System > Software Management > Image List or System > About.Affected if The version is 16.1.0 through 16.1.3.x (any 16.1.0 <= version < 16.1.4.1) or exactly 17.1.0.
-
Identify HTTP/2 profiles in useRun 'tmsh list ltm profile http2' to list all HTTP/2 profiles configured on the system. Note the profile names and the virtual servers they are assigned to.Affected if Any HTTP/2 profile exists and is assigned to a virtual server.
-
Check if HTTP MRF Router option is enabledRun 'tmsh list ltm profile http2 <profile_name>' for each HTTP/2 profile found and look for 'mrf-router enabled'. Alternatively, check via GUI under Local Traffic > Profiles > HTTP/2 > the specific profile.Affected if The mrf-router option is set to enabled on any HTTP/2 profile.
-
Identify iRules with HTTP_REQUEST eventsRun 'tmsh list ltm rule' to list all iRules, then search for 'when HTTP_REQUEST' within the iRule content. Identify which virtual servers these iRules are assigned to.Affected if Any iRule containing an HTTP_REQUEST event is attached to a virtual server that also has an HTTP/2 profile.
-
Check for Local Traffic PoliciesRun 'tmsh list ltm policy' to list all Local Traffic Policies. Identify which virtual servers have active policies attached.Affected if Any Local Traffic Policy is assigned to a virtual server that also has an HTTP/2 profile.
The environment is affected if the BIG-IP version is 16.1.0 through 16.1.3.x or 17.1.0, AND a virtual server has an HTTP/2 profile with MRF Router enabled AND either an iRule with HTTP_REQUEST event or a Local Traffic Policy attached.
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 · scoped16.1.4.1
Apply vendor-supplied patches for affected F5 BIG-IP versions. Alternatively, temporarily disable either the HTTP/2 profile, the MRF Router option, or the iRule/Local Traffic Policy until patching is feasible.
BIG-IP 16.1.4.1 or later (16.1.x); BIG-IP 17.1.1 or later (17.1.x)
- 1. Identify all BIG-IP modules running affected versions (16.1.0-16.1.4.0 or 17.1.0)
- 2. Identify virtual servers using client-side HTTP/2 profiles with HTTP MRF Router option enabled
- 3. Identify iRules using HTTP_REQUEST event or Local Traffic Policies associated with those virtual servers
- 4. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- 5. Back up the BIG-IP configuration
- 6. Upgrade to BIG-IP version 16.1.4.1 or later (for 16.1.x installations)
- 7. For 17.1.0 installations, upgrade to 17.1.1 or later
- 8. Verify the upgrade was successful and services are running
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-40534 — 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-2023-40534 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