Search
Search Results (345 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2017-6148 | 1 F5 | 8 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Application Acceleration Manager and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| Responses to SOCKS proxy requests made through F5 BIG-IP version 13.0.0, 12.0.0-12.1.3.1, 11.6.1-11.6.2, or 11.5.1-11.5.5 may cause a disruption of services provided by TMM. The data plane is impacted and exposed only when a SOCKS proxy profile is attached to a Virtual Server. The control plane is not impacted by this vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2016-7475 | 1 F5 | 8 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Application Acceleration Manager and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| Under some circumstances on BIG-IP 12.0.0-12.1.0, 11.6.0-11.6.1, or 11.4.0-11.5.4 HF1, the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) may not properly clean-up pool member network connections when using SPDY or HTTP/2 virtual server profiles. | ||||
| CVE-2014-5209 | 2 F5, Ntp | 25 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 22 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.3 Medium |
| An Information Disclosure vulnerability exists in NTP 4.2.7p25 private (mode 6/7) messages via a GET_RESTRICT control message, which could let a malicious user obtain sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2014-4024 | 1 F5 | 13 Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager, Big-ip Analytics and 10 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.9 Medium |
| SSL virtual servers in F5 BIG-IP systems 10.x before 10.2.4 HF9, 11.x before 11.2.1 HF12, 11.3.0 before HF10, 11.4.0 before HF8, 11.4.1 before HF5, 11.5.0 before HF5, and 11.5.1 before HF5, when used with third-party Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) accelerator cards, might allow remote attackers to have unspecified impact via a timing side-channel attack. | ||||
| CVE-2013-3587 | 1 F5 | 14 Arx, Big-ip Access Policy Manager, Big-ip Advanced Firewall Manager and 11 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.9 Medium |
| The HTTPS protocol, as used in unspecified web applications, can encrypt compressed data without properly obfuscating the length of the unencrypted data, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain plaintext secret values by observing length differences during a series of guesses in which a string in an HTTP request URL potentially matches an unknown string in an HTTP response body, aka a "BREACH" attack, a different issue than CVE-2012-4929. | ||||