CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2022-32455NVD status: Modified

BIG-IP: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2022-32455 is a high-severity improper restriction of operations within the bounds of a memory buffer vulnerability in BIG-IP from F5, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 14.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2 as the first without the flaw, so updating BIG-IP to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.52% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update BIG-IP to 14.1.5 or 15.1.6.1 or 16.1.2.2, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Update Big-ip Access Policy Manager to 14.1.5 or 15.1.6.1 or 16.1.2.2, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  3. Update Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager to 14.1.5 or 15.1.6.1 or 16.1.2.2, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  4. Read the advisory on support.f5.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  5. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
F5BIG-IP13.1.0 and later; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Access Policy Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Analytics13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Application Acceleration Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Application Security Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Domain Name System13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Fraud Protection Service13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Global Traffic Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Link Controller13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Local Traffic Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2
F5Big-ip Policy Enforcement Manager13.1.0 through 13.1.5; 14.1.0 up to, but not including, 14.1.5; 15.1.0 up to, but not including, 15.1.6.1; 16.1.0 up to, but not including, 16.1.2.214.1.5, 15.1.6.1, 16.1.2.2

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
NoneNo data is disclosed.
Integrity
NoneNothing can be modified.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H. Scored by NVD.

Scoring systemScoreSeverityScored by
CVSS 3.17.5HighCNA (f5.com)
CVSS 3.17.5HighNVD

Official description

In BIG-IP Versions 16.1.x before 16.1.2.2, 15.1.x before 15.1.6.1, 14.1.x before 14.1.5, and all versions of 13.1.x, when a BIG-IP LTM Client SSL profile is configured on a virtual server to perform client certificate authentication with session tickets enabled, undisclosed requests cause the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to terminate. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.

More Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer vulnerabilities (CWE-119)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in BIG-IP

All BIG-IP vulnerabilities

Recent Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.