CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2016-9256

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

Published: May 09, 2017 | Modified: Apr 20, 2025
CVSS 3.x
7.5
HIGH
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS 2.x
6 MEDIUM
AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

In F5 BIG-IP 12.1.0 through 12.1.2, permissions enforced by iControl can lag behind the actual permissions assigned to a user if the role_map is not reloaded between the time the permissions are changed and the time of the users next request. This is a race condition that occurs rarely in normal usage; the typical period in which this is possible is limited to at most a few seconds after the permission change.

Weakness

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Big-ip_local_traffic_manager F5 12.0.0 (including) 12.0.0 (including)
Big-ip_local_traffic_manager F5 12.1.0 (including) 12.1.0 (including)
Big-ip_local_traffic_manager F5 12.1.1 (including) 12.1.1 (including)
Big-ip_local_traffic_manager F5 12.1.2 (including) 12.1.2 (including)

Extended Description

A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

  • Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
  • Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

References