CVE-2025-61935
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 BIG IP Advanced WAF or ASM security policy is configured on a virtual server, undisclosed requests can cause the bd 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 · moderate confidenceThis is a denial-of-service vulnerability in F5 BIG-IP where undisclosed requests can cause the bd (bigd/background daemon) process to terminate when Advanced WAF or ASM security policies are configured on a virtual server. The bd process is critical for BIG-IP operations, and its termination can disrupt traffic processing and policy enforcement.
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>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.10.8>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0>= 15.1.0, < 15.1.10.8>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0CVSS 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 BIG-IP software versionRun 'tmsh show sys version' or 'bigtopctl version' from the command line to obtain the installed BIG-IP versionAffected if The version falls within these ranges: 15.1.0 through 15.1.10.7, 17.1.0 through 17.1.2, or 17.5.0 exactly
-
Verify ASM or Advanced WAF policy is assigned to any virtual serverRun 'tmsh list ltm virtual one-line' to list all virtual servers, then inspect the 'security-nat-policy' or 'asm-policy' attributes to identify which virtual servers have ASM/Advanced WAF policies appliedAffected if Any virtual server has an ASM policy or Advanced WAF policy explicitly assigned to it
-
Confirm the bd process is runningRun 'tmsh show sys process bd' or check 'bigstart status bd' to verify the bigd/background daemon process is currently activeAffected if The bd process is running and conditions in steps 1-2 are met, indicating the vulnerability is potentially exploitable in this environment
-
Identify specific virtual servers with security policiesRun 'tmsh list ltm virtual <virtual_name> security-nat-policy' and 'tmsh list ltm virtual <virtual_name> asm-policy' for each virtual server to map which ones have active ASM or Advanced WAF protectionsAffected if Multiple virtual servers with ASM/Advanced WAF policies increase the attack surface if the version is affected
You are affected if your BIG-IP version is 15.1.0-15.1.10.7, 17.1.0-17.1.2, or 17.5.0 AND you have ASM or Advanced WAF security policies configured on any virtual server, making the bd process vulnerable to termination via specially crafted requests.
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 · scoped15.1.10.817.1.3
Apply the vendor-supplied F5 software update addressing this vulnerability. Until patched, consider implementing rate limiting or traffic filtering at upstream devices to mitigate potential exploitation, and ensure high-availability configurations can handle bd process failures.
15.1.10.8 (for 15.1.x line); 17.1.3 (for 17.1.x line); 17.5.1 or later (for 17.5.0)
- Identify the current BIG-IP version using 'tmsh show sys version' or the web management console
- Determine which affected version line your current installation matches (15.1.x, 17.1.x, or 17.5.0)
- For 15.1.0 <= version < 15.1.10.8: Plan upgrade to version 15.1.10.8 or later in the 15.1.x stable release train
- For 17.1.0 <= version < 17.1.3: Plan upgrade to version 17.1.3 or later in the 17.1.x stable release train
- For version 17.5.0: Plan upgrade to the next available stable release after 17.5.0 (e.g., 17.5.1 or later)
- Before upgrading, review F5 release notes and ensure adequate downtime window for the upgrade process
- After upgrading, verify the bd process is running and monitor for stability
- Test that security policies on virtual servers function correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,256.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61935 — 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-2025-61935 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