dbcve.org
Big Ip Access Policy ManagerApplication · F5

CVE-2025-61951

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-15
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 16.1.6.1 / 17.1.3 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Undisclosed traffic can cause the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to terminate.  This issue may occur when a Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) 1.2 virtual server is enabled with a Server SSL profile that is configured with a certificate, key, and the SSL Sign Hash set to ANY, and the backend server is enabled with DTLS 1.2 and client authentication.  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 confidence

A denial of service vulnerability exists in F5 BIG-IP where specifically crafted DTLS 1.2 traffic can cause the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to terminate. The issue occurs when a DTLS 1.2 virtual server uses a Server SSL profile with SSL Sign Hash set to ANY, combined with a backend server using DTLS 1.2 and client authentication enabled.

MitigationConfigure the Server SSL profile SSL Sign Hash to a specific algorithm (such as SHA256 or SHA384) instead of ANY, or disable client authentication on the backend server if not required. Alternatively, consider disabling DTLS 1.2 if not essential.

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
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Advanced Firewall ManagerApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Advanced Web Application FirewallApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip AnalyticsApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Application Acceleration ManagerApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Application Security ManagerApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Application Visibility And ReportingApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0
Big Ip Automation ToolchainApplication
Affected:>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.6.1>= 17.1.0, < 17.1.3= 17.5.0

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check BIG-IP version
    Run 'tmsh show sys version' or check the web UI under 'System > Software Management > Install' to find the installed version
    Affected if The version falls within 16.1.0 to 16.1.6.0, 17.1.0 to 17.1.2, or equals 17.5.0
  2. Identify DTLS 1.2 virtual servers
    Run 'tmsh list ltm virtual' and look for 'dtls' in the profile configuration or check the virtual server properties for DTLS 1.2 protocol settings
    Affected if Any virtual server is configured to use DTLS 1.2
  3. Check Server SSL profile SSL Sign Hash setting
    Run 'tmsh list ltm profile server-ssl' and examine the 'ssl-sign-hash' field in each profile, or inspect via the web UI under 'Local Traffic > Profiles > SSL > Server'
    Affected if The SSL Sign Hash is set to 'any' (case-insensitive)
  4. Check for backend client authentication with DTLS
    Inspect the backend server-ssl profile configuration for 'client-auth' set to 'enabled' and verify the backend server is using DTLS 1.2, using 'tmsh list ltm profile server-ssl' and reviewing the client-auth and dtls settings
    Affected if Client authentication is enabled on a server SSL profile used with a DTLS 1.2 backend

A system is affected if it runs a vulnerable version AND has a DTLS 1.2 virtual server using a Server SSL profile with SSL Sign Hash set to ANY, combined with a DTLS 1.2 backend that has client authentication enabled.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 16.1.6.1 / 17.1.3 or later
Fixed in 16.1.6.117.1.3
Interim mitigation

Configure the Server SSL profile SSL Sign Hash to a specific algorithm (such as SHA256 or SHA384) instead of ANY, or disable client authentication on the backend server if not required. Alternatively, consider disabling DTLS 1.2 if not essential.

Recommended fix High confidence

Upgrade to 16.1.6.1+ (16.1.x), 17.1.3+ (17.1.x), or 17.5.1+ (17.5.x) depending on your current release branch

  1. 1. Identify the current BIG-IP version by running 'tmsh show sys version' or checking the web UI (System > Software > Image List)
  2. 2. Determine which BIG-IP module (APM, AFM, ASM, etc.) is running the affected DTLS 1.2 virtual server with Server SSL profile
  3. 3. For 16.1.x deployments: Upgrade to version 16.1.6.1 or later
  4. 4. For 17.1.x deployments: Upgrade to version 17.1.3 or later
  5. 5. For 17.5.0 deployments: Upgrade to version 17.5.1 or later (the next available patch)
  6. 6. After upgrade, verify the DTLS 1.2 virtual server configuration includes Server SSL profile with SSL Sign Hash set to ANY
  7. 7. Confirm TMM processes are stable post-upgrade using 'tmsh show sys tmm-info'
Caveat Review release notes for your target version for any configuration or behavior changes; test in non-production environment first

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Big Ip Access Policy Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,060
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61951 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-61951 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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