Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2022-41800 is a high-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in F5 Big-Ip Access Policy Manager. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, ranked in the top 0.9% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2022-41800 affects all versions of F5 BIG-IP when operating in Appliance mode. An authenticated user holding the Administrator role can exploit an undisclosed iControl REST endpoint to bypass Appliance mode restrictions, enabling the attacker to cross a defined security boundary. The flaw is tracked under CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.7.
An attacker must already possess valid Administrator credentials on an affected BIG-IP system running in Appliance mode. Successful exploitation permits the administrator to perform actions that Appliance mode is intended to prevent, resulting in a loss of confidentiality and integrity while availability remains unaffected.
F5 has published mitigation guidance in knowledge-base article K13325942, which addresses the issue for supported software versions; releases that have reached End of Technical Support are not evaluated.
The associated EPSS score currently stands at 0.9268 with a recorded peak of 0.9395.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2022-44968
Vulnerability Data
In all versions of BIG-IP, when running in Appliance mode, an authenticated user assigned the Administrator role may be able to bypass Appliance mode restrictions, utilizing an undisclosed iControl REST endpoint. A successful exploit can allow the attacker to cross…
more
a security boundary. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI
Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces Appliance mode access restrictions that the undisclosed iControl REST endpoint bypass allows an Administrator to violate.
Enforces information flow controls that prevent crossing the security boundary the vulnerability is explicitly designed to bypass.
Implements boundary protection mechanisms whose failure permits the Appliance mode escape described in the CVE.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.