Total
524 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-6609 | 1 F5 | 37 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 34 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Platform dependent weakness. This issue only impacts iSeries platforms. On these platforms, in BIG-IP (LTM, AAM, AFM, Analytics, APM, ASM, DNS, Edge Gateway, FPS, GTM, Link Controller, PEM, WebAccelerator) versions 14.0.0-14.1.0.1, 13.0.0-13.1.1.3, and 12.1.1 HF2-12.1.4, the secureKeyCapable attribute was not set which causes secure vault to not use the F5 hardware support to store the unit key. Instead the unit key is stored in plaintext on disk as would be the case for Z100 systems. Additionally this causes the unit key to be stored in UCS files taken on these platforms. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6608 | 1 F5 | 14 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 11 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.1 HIGH | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.6.3, 12.1.0-12.1.3, 13.0.0-13.1.1.1, and 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, under certain conditions, the snmpd daemon may leak memory on a multi-blade BIG-IP vCMP guest when processing authorized SNMP requests. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6606 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.6.3.4, 12.1.0-12.1.3.7, 13.0.0-13.1.1.3, and 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, when processing certain SNMP requests with a request-id of 0, the snmpd process may leak a small amount of memory. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6605 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.5.8, 11.6.1-11.6.3, and 12.0.x, an undisclosed sequence of packets received by an SSL virtual server and processed by an associated Client SSL or Server SSL profile may cause a denial of service. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6604 | 1 F5 | 14 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 11 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.8 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.5.8, 11.6.1-11.6.3, 12.1.0-12.1.3.6, 13.0.0-13.1.1.1, and 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, under certain conditions, hardware systems with a High-Speed Bridge and using non-default Layer 2 forwarding configurations may experience a lockup of the High-Speed Bridge. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6603 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| In BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.5.8, 11.6.1-11.6.3, 12.1.0-12.1.3, and 13.0.0-13.0.1, malformed TCP packets sent to a self IP address or a FastL4 virtual server may cause an interruption of service. The control plane is not exposed to this issue. This issue impacts the data plane virtual servers and self IPs. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6602 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| In BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.5.8 and 11.6.1-11.6.3, the Configuration Utility login page may not follow best security practices when handling a malicious request. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6600 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| In BIG-IP 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, 13.0.0-13.1.1.3, 12.1.0-12.1.3.7, 11.6.1-11.6.3.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.8, when remote authentication is enabled for administrative users and all external users are granted the "guest" role, unsanitized values can be reflected to the client via the login page. This can lead to a cross-site scripting attack against unauthenticated clients. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6599 | 1 F5 | 1 Big-ip Access Policy Manager | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| In BIG-IP 11.6.1-11.6.3.2 or 11.5.1-11.5.8, or Enterprise Manager 3.1.1, improper escaping of values in an undisclosed page of the configuration utility may result with an improper handling on the JSON response when it is injected by a malicious script via a remote cross-site scripting (XSS) attack. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6598 | 1 F5 | 14 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 11 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| In BIG-IP 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, 13.0.0-13.1.0.7, 12.1.0-12.1.3.5, 11.6.1-11.6.3.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.8 or Enterprise Manager 3.1.1, malformed requests to the Traffic Management User Interface (TMUI), also referred to as the BIG-IP Configuration utility, may lead to disruption of TMUI services. This attack requires an authenticated user with any role (other than the No Access role). The No Access user role cannot login and does not have the access level to perform the attack. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6597 | 1 F5 | 14 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 11 more | 2024-11-21 | 6.5 MEDIUM | 7.2 HIGH |
| In BIG-IP 13.0.0-13.1.1.1, 12.1.0-12.1.3.7, 11.6.1-11.6.3.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.8 or Enterprise Manager 3.1.1, when authenticated administrative users run commands in the Traffic Management User Interface (TMUI), also referred to as the BIG-IP Configuration utility, restrictions on allowed commands may not be enforced. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6596 | 1 F5 | 1 Big-ip Access Policy Manager | 2024-11-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| In BIG-IP 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, 13.0.0-13.1.1.1, 12.1.0-12.1.3.6, 11.6.1-11.6.3.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.8, when processing fragmented ClientHello messages in a DTLS session TMM may corrupt memory eventually leading to a crash. Only systems offering DTLS connections via APM are impacted. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6595 | 1 F5 | 1 Big-ip Access Policy Manager | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) 11.5.x and 11.6.x Admin Web UI. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6594 | 1 F5 | 12 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 9 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.6.3.2, 12.1.3.4-12.1.3.7, 13.0.0 HF1-13.1.1.1, and 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, Multi-Path TCP (MPTCP) does not protect against multiple zero length DATA_FINs in the reassembly queue, which can lead to an infinite loop in some circumstances. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6593 | 1 F5 | 12 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 9 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 11.5.1-11.5.4, 11.6.1, and 12.1.0, a virtual server configured with a Client SSL profile may be vulnerable to a chosen ciphertext attack against CBC ciphers. When exploited, this may result in plaintext recovery of encrypted messages through a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack, despite the attacker not having gained access to the server's private key itself. (CVE-2019-6593 also known as Zombie POODLE and GOLDENDOODLE.) | |||||
| CVE-2019-6592 | 1 F5 | 12 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 9 more | 2024-11-21 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| On BIG-IP 14.1.0-14.1.0.1, TMM may restart and produce a core file when validating SSL certificates in client SSL or server SSL profiles. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6591 | 1 F5 | 1 Big-ip Access Policy Manager | 2024-11-21 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP APM 14.0.0 to 14.0.0.4, 13.0.0 to 13.1.1.3 and 12.1.0 to 12.1.3.7, a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the resource information page for authenticated users when a full webtop is configured on the BIG-IP APM system. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6589 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| On BIG-IP 14.0.0-14.0.0.2, 13.0.0-13.1.1.3, 12.1.0-12.1.3.7, and 11.6.0-11.6.3.2, a reflected Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is present in an undisclosed page of the BIG-IP TMUI (Traffic Management User Interface) also known as the BIG-IP configuration utility. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6471 | 2 F5, Isc | 17 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 14 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| A race condition which may occur when discarding malformed packets can result in BIND exiting due to a REQUIRE assertion failure in dispatch.c. Versions affected: BIND 9.11.0 -> 9.11.7, 9.12.0 -> 9.12.4-P1, 9.14.0 -> 9.14.2. Also all releases of the BIND 9.13 development branch and version 9.15.0 of the BIND 9.15 development branch and BIND Supported Preview Edition versions 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.7-S1. | |||||
| CVE-2019-1559 | 13 Canonical, Debian, F5 and 10 more | 90 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Big-ip Access Policy Manager and 87 more | 2024-11-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| If an application encounters a fatal protocol error and then calls SSL_shutdown() twice (once to send a close_notify, and once to receive one) then OpenSSL can respond differently to the calling application if a 0 byte record is received with invalid padding compared to if a 0 byte record is received with an invalid MAC. If the application then behaves differently based on that in a way that is detectable to the remote peer, then this amounts to a padding oracle that could be used to decrypt data. In order for this to be exploitable "non-stitched" ciphersuites must be in use. Stitched ciphersuites are optimised implementations of certain commonly used ciphersuites. Also the application must call SSL_shutdown() twice even if a protocol error has occurred (applications should not do this but some do anyway). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2r (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2q). | |||||