On BIG-IP versions 17.0.x before 17.0.0.2 and 16.1.x before 16.1.3.3, and BIG-IP SPK starting in version 1.6.0, when a client-side HTTP/2 profile and the HTTP MRF Router option are enabled for a virtual server, undisclosed requests can cause an increase in memory resource utilization. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.
Weakness
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
Affected Software
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Big-ip_access_policy_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_access_policy_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_advanced_firewall_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_advanced_firewall_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_analytics | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_analytics | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_application_acceleration_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_application_acceleration_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_application_security_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_application_security_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_ddos_hybrid_defender | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_ddos_hybrid_defender | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_domain_name_system | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_domain_name_system | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_fraud_protection_service | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_fraud_protection_service | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_link_controller | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_link_controller | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_local_traffic_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_local_traffic_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_policy_enforcement_manager | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_policy_enforcement_manager | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_ssl_orchestrator | F5 | 16.1.0 (including) | 16.1.3.3 (excluding) |
| Big-ip_ssl_orchestrator | F5 | 17.0.0 (including) | 17.0.0.2 (excluding) |
Potential Mitigations
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:
The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.
The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.
Related Attack Patterns
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/147.html
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/227.html
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/492.html