Every applicability statement published about this vulnerability, kept as each source wrote it rather than merged into one verdict. Where sources disagree, both positions are shown.
A statement that names no version covers the whole product, which is not the same as your version falling inside a range. Orderings marked best effort come from schemes with no published comparison algorithm; exact ones follow a published specification.
Precedence decides which claim wins when two sources describe the same product over the same version range. It is a property of the source, not of the claim, and changing it re-ranks the data without re-reading a single document.
| Product | Status | Versions | Remediation | Source | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 16.1.x, < 16.1.2.2 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 15.1.x, < 15.1.5.1 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 14.1.x, < 14.1.4.6 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 13.1.x, < 13.1.5 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 12.1.x, <= 12.1.6 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | affected | >= 11.6.x, <= 11.6.5 | none available | cve_cna | |
| F5/BIG-IP F5 · BIG-IP | not affected | 17.0.0 | not applicable | cve_cna |
A claim with no version range is shown as written rather than expanded: a government catalog naming only a vendor and product is a real statement at zero granularity, and inventing bounds for it would put precision in the record that the source never offered.