CVE-2025-61938
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 with a URL greater than 1024 characters in length for the Data Guard Protection Enforcement setting, either manually or through the automatic Policy Builder, the bd process can terminate repeatedly. 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 Advanced WAF and ASM where the bd process terminates repeatedly when Data Guard Protection Enforcement is configured with URLs exceeding 1024 characters, whether configured manually or through automatic Policy Builder.
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>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0>= 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 versionRun 'tmsh show /sys version' or view the version in the BIG-IP Configuration Utility under System > Software Management > Installed VersionsAffected if The installed version is 17.1.0 through 17.1.2, or exactly 17.5.0
-
Verify ASM or Advanced WAF is provisionedRun 'tmsh list /sys provision asm' or 'tmsh list /sys provision afm' to check if Application Security Manager is provisionedAffected if ASM or Advanced WAF module is provisioned on the BIG-IP device
-
Confirm Data Guard Protection Enforcement is enabledAccess the security policy in the BIG-IP Configuration Utility under Security > Application Security > Data Guard, or run 'tmsh list /asm policy' to list policies and inspect Data Guard settingsAffected if Data Guard Protection Enforcement is enabled in any active security policy
-
Inspect configured URLs in Data Guard for length exceeding 1024 charactersReview all URLs configured in Data Guard Protection settings. In the GUI, navigate to Security > Application Security > Data Guard > Allowed URLs and check the URL length of each entry. Alternatively, export the security policy and search for URL configurations.Affected if Any allowed URL in Data Guard configuration exceeds 1024 characters in length
You are affected if your BIG-IP runs version 17.1.0-17.1.2 or 17.5.0, has ASM/Advanced WAF provisioned, and has Data Guard Protection Enforcement enabled with URLs longer than 1024 characters.
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 · scoped17.1.3
Review and modify Data Guard Protection Enforcement settings to ensure URLs are not configured to exceed 1024 characters, or apply vendor patches when available. Consider implementing URL length validation in security policies.
17.1.3+ or 17.5.1+ (depending on your current major.minor branch)
- Upgrade BIG-IP Advanced WAF or ASM from version 17.1.0-17.1.2 to version 17.1.3 or later
- If running version 17.5.0, upgrade to version 17.5.1 or later
- After upgrade, verify the bd process is stable and not terminating
- Confirm Data Guard Protection Enforcement with URLs of any length now functions correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $7,296.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61938 — 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-2025-61938 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