CVE-2025-58120VulnerabilityPublished 15 Oct 2025Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-58120: F5 BIG-IP Next SPK · NULL Pointer Dereference

Affects F5 BIG-IP Next SPKSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Oct 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
F5 BIG-IP Next SPK	Affected =2.0.0 =1.9.0 =1.8.0 =1.7.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediately review and restrict HTTP/2 Ingress configurations on affected BIG-IP Next SPK devices, disabling HTTP/2 Ingress if not strictly required. 2. Implement network-level filtering to block or limit traffic patterns that could trigger the NULL pointer dereference, using anomaly detection or rate limiting on ingress points. 3. Monitor TMM process stability and system logs closely for signs of unexpected termination or crashes. 4. Coordinate with F5 Networks for timely updates and patches; apply official patches as soon as they become available. 5. Employ redundant BIG-IP devices and failover configurations to minimize service disruption in case of TMM failure. 6. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAF) or Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) to detect and block malformed or suspicious HTTP/2 traffic. 7. Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focused on HTTP/2 traffic handling to identify potential exploitation attempts. 8. Maintain an incident response plan that includes procedures for rapid recovery from BIG-IP service interruptions.

Description

When HTTP/2 Ingress is configured, undisclosed traffic can cause the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM) to terminate. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-58120 is a denial of service condition caused by the termination of the TMM process on affected F5 BIG-IP Next SPK devices. This disruption can lead to network traffic management failures, resulting in service outages for applications and services relying on BIG-IP for load balancing, security, and traffic routing. Organizations using these devices in critical infrastructure, cloud environments, or enterprise networks may experience degraded network performance or complete loss of service availability. The vulnerability does not directly compromise data confidentiality or integrity but can indirectly affect business operations and service continuity. Given the widespread use of F5 BIG-IP products in sectors such as finance, telecommunications, healthcare, and government, the potential for operational disruption is significant. Attackers could leverage this vulnerability to cause targeted outages or as part of a broader attack campaign to degrade network defenses.

Summary

CVE-2025-58120 is a vulnerability identified in F5 BIG-IP Next SPK, specifically affecting versions 1.7.0, 1.8.0, 1.9.0, and 2.0.0. The flaw is a NULL pointer dereference (CWE-476) that occurs when HTTP/2 Ingress is enabled and certain undisclosed traffic is received by the Traffic Management Microkernel (TMM). The TMM is a core component responsible for managing network traffic and load balancing within the BIG-IP platform. When the vulnerability is triggered, the TMM process terminates unexpectedly, causing a denial of service (DoS) by disrupting traffic management functions. The vulnerability can be exploited remotely without any authentication or user interaction, making it accessible to unauthenticated attackers over the network. The CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 reflects the high impact on availability (A:H) with no impact on confidentiality or integrity, and the attack vector is network-based with low attack complexity. Although no public exploits have been reported yet, the critical role of BIG-IP devices in enterprise and service provider networks makes this vulnerability a significant concern. The lack of available patches at the time of publication necessitates immediate risk mitigation and monitoring by affected organizations.

CWE-476NULL Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #13OWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.
Implementation
For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished.
Requirements
Select a programming language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is non-null before acting upon it.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K000156623 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 05:39 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-476

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats