CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-61951

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Oct 15, 2025 | Modified: Oct 21, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

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.

Weakness

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Big-ip_access_policy_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_advanced_firewall_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_advanced_web_application_firewall F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_analytics F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_application_acceleration_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_application_security_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_application_visibility_and_reporting F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_automation_toolchain F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_carrier-grade_nat F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_container_ingress_services F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_ddos_hybrid_defender F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_domain_name_system F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_edge_gateway F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_fraud_protection_service F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_global_traffic_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_link_controller F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_local_traffic_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_policy_enforcement_manager F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_ssl_orchestrator F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_webaccelerator F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)
Big-ip_websafe F5 16.1.0 (including) 16.1.6.1 (excluding)

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

References