If one looks at 9th/11th circuit rulings, it is very clear that 4617(f) does not bar judicial review of unlawfull decisions of FHFA as a regulator or conservator.
Court Litigations start with allegations or complaints. Allegation or complaints can be violation of laws or agreements. Courts decide what is lawful and what is not lawful.
In FnF cases, FHFA is using 4617(f) bar on judicial review to prevent Courts from reviewing whether FHFA decisions are lawful or unlawful.
These two statements are counter-intuitive. By your own definition, something is unlawful after the court says it is unlawful. But you say that 4617(f) has barred review of unlawful action. So, what court has found FHFA unlawful in order for that conduct to be reviewed by court. It's kind of a chicken and egg situation the way you describe it.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
