Big Ip Access Policy ManagerApplication · F5
CVE-2023-43124
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 · uneditedBIG-IP APM clients may send IP traffic outside of the VPN tunnel. 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 confidenceBIG-IP APM clients may send IP traffic outside of the VPN tunnel due to a split tunneling misconfiguration or logic flaw, causing sensitive traffic to be exposed to untrusted networks instead of being protected by the encrypted tunnel.
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
>= 14.1.5.2, <= 14.1.5.6>= 15.1.8, <= 15.1.10>= 16.1.3.3, <= 16.1.4= 13.1.5.1= 17.1.0
Big Ip Access Policy Manager ClientApplication
>= 7.2.3, <= 7.2.4CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
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 BIG-IP APM versionRun 'tmsh show /sys version' or check /etc/oracle-release on the BIG-IP deviceAffected if The displayed version falls within: 14.1.5.2-14.1.5.6, 15.1.8-15.1.10, 16.1.3.3-16.1.4, 13.1.5.1, or 17.1.0
-
Identify APM Client versionCheck the installed APM Client version on endpoints using 'f5fpc-client --version' or verify through the F5 APM Client installer packageAffected if The client version is between 7.2.3 and 7.2.4 inclusive
-
Review split tunneling configuration in Connectivity ProfileIn BIG-IP Configuration Utility, navigate to Access Policy > Access Profiles > [Profile Name] > Connectivity / Tunneling > Connectivity Profile, or use tmsh: 'list /apm connectivity-profile [profile-name] split-tunneling'Affected if Split tunneling is enabled and specific networks are excluded from the tunnel, or the configuration allows traffic to route outside the VPN based on destination
-
Verify split tunneling network assignmentsRun 'tmsh list /apm connectivity-profile' to list all connectivity profiles and their split-tunnel-network-list settingsAffected if The split-tunnel-network-list includes any networks that should be protected but are excluded, or includes 'all' traffic with exceptions rather than tunneling all traffic
You are affected if your BIG-IP APM version matches the affected ranges and split tunneling is configured to route any traffic outside the encrypted VPN tunnel.
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 dataReview and correct the APM VPN tunnel configuration to ensure all IP traffic is routed through the tunnel; apply applicable F5 patches if this is a software defect rather than a configuration issue.
Fix this in Big Ip Access Policy Manager
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-43124 — 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-2023-43124 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