OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Broken Object Level Authorization and BIG-IP APM
Addressing Broken Object Level Authorization (BOLA) vulnerabilities requires a multifaceted approach, combining robust coding practices, secure development methodologies, and powerful tools. Among these tools, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) stands out as a crucial component in the arsenal of security measures. This article, the second in a series of articles dedicated to fortifying application security, delves into the pivotal role that BIG-IP APM plays in identifying, mitigating, and ultimately preventing OWASP top 10 API vulnerabilities byproviding developers and security professionals with a comprehensive guide to bolstering application security in the face of evolving cyber threats. Broken Object Level Authorization This is one of the most common and severe vulnerabilities within APIs and is related to Insecure Direct Object References (IDOR). Starting with, what's Object Level Authorization? This is an access control mechanism that's in place to validate which user has access to a specific endpoint and what actions to be performed. BOLA and IDOR refer to situations where the endpoints fail to enforce specific authorization rules on endpoints, or the user is successfully able to access unauthorized endpoints and perform unauthorized actions. The weakness that can lead to this vulnerability is the server component fails to track client state and rely on other parameters that can be tweaked from the client side, for example (Cookies, object IDs). BOLA Example Let's assume this backend directory, - /uploads/ - user1/ - file1.txt - file2.txt - user2/ - file3.txt - file4.txt The expected user1 usage is as follows, https://example.com/viewfile?file=file1.txt the user can access file1. If the server is vulnerable to BOLA, let's have user2 accessing the server, then try to navigate to file1 as follows, https://example.com/viewfile?file=user1/file1.txt What could help us in this situation? Yes, we need granular endpoint authorization with proper client state tracking. That's where our lovely friend BIG-IP APM comes into the picture. Let's see how BIG-IP APM can help us. BIG-IP APM and BOLA protection BIG-IP APM provides API protection through its Per-Request policy, where the it applies granular Access protection to each API endpoint. How BIG-IP APM enhancesdefenses We start with creating our Per-Request policy, this policy works in a different way than the per-session policy, as the flow will be evaluted on a per-request basis, making sure to consider variations throught the session life-time. Below are some of the key benefits: Wide range of Authentication, SSO, and MFA mechanisms to properly identify the initiating machine or user. Ability to integrate with 3rd parties to provide additional enforcement decisions based on the organization's policy. Ability to apply endpoint checks on the client side before session initiation. This goes to BIG-IP in general, the ability to apply custom traffic control on both of the traffic sides, Client and Server. Using BIG-IP API protection profile. Protection profiles are an easy way to deploy both APM (Per-Request policy) and Advanced Web Application Firewall (AWAF). As a pre-requisite, you need APM, AWAF licensed and provisioned. Use OpenAPI Spec 2.0 as an input to the API protection. Apply different Authentication methods, whether Basic, Oauth (Directly from the template), or once we have the API protection profile created, we can customize policy elements to our needs. Using Hybrid approach with F5 Distributed Cloud (F5 XC) + BIG-IP APM We had this approach discussed in details through F5Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 5 - F5 XC, BIG-IP APM, CIS, and NGINX Ingress Controller) Stay engaged to explore the comprehensive capabilities of BIG-IP APM and how it plays a pivotal role in fortifying your security posture against these formidable threats. Related Content F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager | F5 Introduction to OWASP API Security Top 10 2023 OWASP Top 10 API Security Risks – 2023 - OWASP API Security Top 10 API Protection Concepts OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: How BIG-IP APM Strengthens Defenses Against OWASP Top 10 F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 5 - F5 XC, BIG-IP APM, CIS, and NGINX Ingress Controller)Ridiculously Easy Bot Protection: How to Use BIG-IP APM to Streamline Bot Defense Implementation
Ever imagined how your Bot solution implementation would be with a standard entry page at your application side--a page that’s easily referred, with clear parameters, and structured customization options? In this article, we are exploring using F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (BIG-IP APM) along side F5 Distributed Cloud Bot Defense (XC Bot Defense). Bot defense solutions' challenges Implementing bot defense solutions presents several challenges, each with unique considerations: Evolving Bot Tactics: Bot tactics constantly evolve, demanding adaptive detection methods to avoid both false positives (blocking legitimate users) and false negatives (allowing malicious bots through). Effective solutions must be highly flexible and responsive to these changes. Multi-Environment Integration: Bot defenses need to be deployed across diverse environments, including web, mobile, and APIs, adding layers of complexity to integration. Ensuring seamless protection across these platforms is critical. Balancing Security and Performance: Security measures must be balanced with performance to avoid degrading the user experience. A well-calibrated bot defense should secure the application without causing noticeable slowdowns or other disruptions for legitimate users. Data Privacy Compliance: Bot solutions often require extensive data collection, so adherence to data privacy laws is essential. Ensuring that bot defense practices align with regulatory standards helps avoid legal complications and maintains user trust. Resource Demands: Integrating bot defense with existing security stacks can be resource-intensive, both in terms of cost and skilled personnel. Proper configuration, monitoring, and maintenance require dedicated resources to ensure long-term effectiveness and efficiency. What F5 BIG-IP APM brings to the table? For teams working on bot defense solutions, several operational challenges can arise: Targeted Implementation Complexity: Identifying the correct application page for applying bot defense is often a complex process. Teams must ensure the solution targets the page containing the specific parameters they want to protect, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. Adaptation to Application Changes: Changes like upgrades or redesigns of the application page often require adjustments to bot defenses. These modifications can translate into significant resource commitments, as teams work to ensure the bot solution remains aligned with the new page structure. BIG-IP APM simplifies this process by making it easier to identify and target the correct page, reducing the time and resources needed for implementation. This allows technical and business resources to focus on more strategic priorities, such as fine-tuning bot defenses, optimizing protection, and enhancing application performance. Architecture and traffic flow In this section, let's explore how F5 XC Bot Defense and BIG-IP APM works together, let's list the prerequisites, F5 XC account with access to Bot Defense. APM licensed and provisioned. F5 BIG-IP min. v16.x for native connector integration. BIG-IP Self IP rechability to Internet to communicate with F5 XC, mainly to reach this domin (ibd-web.fastcache.net). Now, time to go quickly through our beloved TMM packet order. Due to the nature of BIG-IP APM Access events take precedence to the Bot enforcement, hence we will rely on simple iRule to apply Bot Defense on BIG-IP APM logon page. BIG-IP Bot Defense is responsible for inserting the JS and passing traffic from client to APM VS back and forth. BIG-IP APM responsible for logon page, MFA, API security or SSO integrations to manage client Access to the backend application. Solution Implementation Let's start now with our solution implementation, F5 Distributed Cloud Bot defense connector with BIG-IP was discussed in details in this Article F5 Distributed Cloud Bot Defense on BIG-IP 17.1 You will follow the steps mentioned in the article, with few changes mentioned below, API Hostname Web: ibd-web.fastcache.net For Per-session policies we use /my.policy as the target URL, while for Per-request and MFA implementation, you need to add /vdesk/*. Protection Pool - Web: Create pool with FQDN ibd-web.fastcache.net Virtual server, Create LTM virtual server to listen to incoming traffic, perform SSL offloading, HTTP profile and attach Bot Defense connector profile. Forwarding iRule, attach forwarding irule to the Bot virtual server. when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { ## Forwarding to the APM Virtual Server virtual Auth_VS } BIG-IP APM Policies,In this step we are creating two options of our deployment, Per-Session policy, where BIG-IP presents Logon page to the user. Per-Request policy, which services in case initial logon is handled at remote IdP and APM handles Per-request, MFA authentication or API security. Now, it's time to run the traffic and observe the results, From client browser, we can see the customer1.js inserted, From F5 XC Dashboard, Conclusion The primary goal of incorporating BIG-IP APM into the Bot Defense solution is to strike a balance between accelerating application development across web and mobile platforms while enforcing consistent organizational bot policies. By decoupling application login and authentication from the application itself, this approach enables a more streamlined, optimized, and secure bot defense implementation. It allows development teams to concentrate on application performance and feature enhancements, knowing that security measures are robustly managed and seamlessly integrated into the infrastructure. Related Content F5 Distributed Cloud Bot Defense on BIG-IP 17.1 Bot Detection and Security: Stop Automated Attacks 2024 Bad Bots ReviewMitigate OWASP LLM Security Risk: Sensitive Information Disclosure Using F5 NGINX App Protect
This short WAF security article covered the critical security gaps present in current generative AI applications, emphasizing the urgent need for robust protection measures in LLM design deployments. Finally we also demonstrated how F5 Nginx App Protect v5 offers an effective solution to mitigate the OWASP LLM Top 10 risks.OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Broken Function Level Authorization (BFLA)
Broken Function Level Authorization (BFLA) is a type of security vulnerability in web applications where an attacker can access functionality or perform actions they should not be authorized to perform. This problem happens when an application doesn’t check access control on functions or endpoints correctly. This lets users do things that are not allowed. In this article, we are going through API5 item from OWASP Top 10 API Security risks and exploring F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) as a role in our arsenal Let’s consider our test application for each retail agent to submit their sales data, but without the ability to retrieve any from the system. In HTTP terms, the retail agent can POST but not allowed to perform GET, while the manager can perform GET to check agents performance, and collected data. Mitigating Risks with BIG-IP APM BIG-IP APM per-request granularity: with per-request granularity, organizations can dynamically enforce access policies based on various factors such as user identity, device characteristics, and contextual information. This enables organizations to implement fine-grained access controls at the API level, mitigating the risks associated with Broken Function Level Authorization. Key Features: Dynamic Access Control Policies: BIG-IP APM empowers organizations to define dynamic access control policies that adapt to changing conditions in real-time. By evaluating each API request against these policies, BIG-IP APM ensures that authorized users can only perform specific authorized functions (actions) on specified resources. Granular Authorization Rules: BIG-IP APM enables organizations to define granular authorization rules that govern access to individual objects or resources within the API ecosystem. By enforcing strict permission checks at the object level, F5 BIG-IP APM prevents unauthorized functions. Related Content F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager | F5 Introduction to OWASP API Security Top 10 2023 OWASP Top 10 API Security Risks – 2023 - OWASP API Security Top 10 API Protection Concepts OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: How BIG-IP APM Strengthens Defenses Against OWASP Top 10 OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Broken Object-Level Authorization and BIG-IP APM F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 5 - F5 XC, BIG-IP APM, CIS, and NGINX Ingress Controller) OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Broken Authentication and BIG-IP APM OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Broken Object Property-Level Authorization and BIG-IP APM OWASP Tactical Access Defense Series: Unrestricted Resource ConsumptionF5 Hybrid Security Architectures: Part 3 F5 XC API Protection and NGINX Ingress
Here in this example solution, we will be using DevSecOps practices to deploy an AWS Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) cluster running the Arcadia Finance test web application serviced by F5 NGINX Ingress Controller for Kubernetes. For protection, will provide API Discovery and Security with F5 Distributed Cloud's Web App and API Protection service. Introduction: For those of you following along with the F5 Hybrid Security Architectures series, welcome back! If this is your first foray into the series and would like some background, have a look at the intro article. This series is using theF5 Hybrid Security ArchitecturesGitHub repo and CI/CD platform to deploy F5 based hybrid security solutions based on DevSecOps principles. This repo is a community supported effort to provide not only a demo and workshop, but also a stepping stone for utilizing these practicesin your own F5 deployments. If you find any bugs or have any enhancement requests, open a issue or better yet contribute! API Security: APIs are an integral part of our daily routine, facilitating everything from critical to mundane tasks. From banking and ride-sharing apps to the weather updates we check before stepping out, APIs enable these functionalities. Given the sensitive nature of the data that can be exposed by unprotected APIs, the need for effective security cannot be stressed enough. With F5 Distributed Cloud Web App and API protection security teams can discover, inventory, and secure these critical APIs. Here in this example solution, we will be using DevSecOps practices to deploy an AWS Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) cluster running the Brewz test web application serviced by F5 NGINX Ingress Controller. To secure our application and APIs, we will deploy F5 Distributed Cloud's Web App and API Protection service. This will provide us API Discovery and Security as well as a traditional Web Application Firewall and Malicious User Detection. Distributed Cloud WAAP:Available for SaaS-based deploymentsand provides comprehensive security solutions designed to safeguard web applications and APIs from a wide range of cyber threats. This solution utilizes a distributed cloud architecture, which enables it to provide real-time protection and scale to meet the needs of large enterprises. NIGNX Ingress Controller for Kubernetes: A lightweight software solution that helps manage app connectivity at the edge of a Kubernetes cluster by directing requests to the appropriate services and pods. It provides advanced load balancing, routing, identity, and security, as well as montioring and observability features. XC WAAP + NGINX Ingress Controller Workflow GitHub Repo: F5 Hybrid Security Architectures Prerequisites: F5 Distributed Cloud Account (F5 XC) Create an F5 XC API certificate NGINX Ingress Controller license AWS Account- Due to the assets being created, free tier will not work. Terraform Cloud Account GitHub Account Assets xc: F5 Distributed Cloud WAAP nic:NGINX Ingress Controller infra: AWS Infrastructure (VPC, IGW, etc.) eks:AWS Elastic Kubernetes Service brewz: Brewz SPA test web application Tools Cloud Provider: AWS Infrastructure as Code: Terraform Infrastructure as Code State: Terraform Cloud CI/CD: GitHub Actions Terraform Cloud Workspaces: Create a workspace for each asset in the workflow chosen Workflow: xc-nic Workspaces: infra, eks, nic, brewz, xc Your Terraform Cloud console should resemble the following: Variable Set: Create a Variable Set with the following values. IMPORTANT:Ensure sensitive values are appropriatelymarked. AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID: Your AWS Access Key ID - Environment Variable AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY: Your AWS Secret Access Key - Environment Variable AWS_SESSION_TOKEN: Your AWS Session Token - Environment Variable VOLT_API_P12_FILE: Your F5 XC API certificate. Set this to api.p12 - Environment Variable VES_P12_PASSWORD: Set this to the password you supplied when creating your F5 XC API key - Environment Variable nginx_jwt: Your NGINX Java Web Token associatedwith your NGINX license - Terraform Variable ssh_key: Your ssh key for access to created compute assets - Terrraform Variable tf_cloud_organization: Your Terraform Cloud Organization name - Terraform Variable Your Variable Set should resemble the following: GitHub Fork and Clone Repo:F5 Hybrid Security Architectures ctions Secrets: Create the following GitHub Actions secrets in your forked repo XC_P12: The base64 encoded F5 XC API certificate TF_API_TOKEN: Your Terraform Cloud API token TF_CLOUD_ORGANIZATION: Your Terraform Cloud Organization TF_CLOUD_WORKSPACE_workspace: Create for each workspace used in your workflow. EX:TF_CLOUD_WORKSPACE_XCwould be created with the value xc Your GitHub Actions Secrets should resemble the following: Setup Deployment Branch and Terraform Local Variables: Step 1: Check out a branch for the deploy workflow using the following naming convention xc-nic deployment branch: deploy-xcapi-nic Step 2:Rename infra/terraform.tfvars.examples to infra/terraform.tfvars and add the following data #Global project_prefix = "Your project identifier" resource_owner = "You" #AWS aws_region = "Your AWS region" ex: us-west-1 azs = "Your AWS availability zones" ex: ["us-west-1a", "us-west-1b"] #Assets nic = true nap = false bigip = false bigip-cis = false Step 3: Rename xc/terraform.tfvars.examples to xc/terraform.tfvars and add the following data #XC Global api_url = "https://.console.ves.volterra.io/api" xc_tenant = "Your XC Tenant Name" xc_namespace = "Your XC namespace" #XC LB app_domain = "Your App Domain" #XC WAF xc_waf_blocking = true #XC AI/ML Settings for MUD, APIP - NOTE: Only set if using AI/ML settings from the shared namespace xc_app_type = [] xc_multi_lb = false #XC API Protection and Discovery xc_api_disc = true xc_api_pro = true xc_api_spec = ["Path to uploaded API spec"] *See below screen shot for how to obtain this value. #XC Bot Defense xc_bot_def = false #XC DDoS xc_ddos = false #XC Malicious User Detection xc_mud = true For Path to API Spec navigate to Manage->Files->Swagger Files, click the three dots next to your OAS, and choose "Copy Latest Version's URL". Paste this into the xc_api_spec in the xc/terraform.tfvars. Step 4: Modify line 16 in the .gitignore and comment out the *.tfvars line with # and save the file Step 5: Commit your changes Deployment: Step 1: Push your deploy branch to the forked repo Step 2:Back in GitHub, navigate to the Actions tab of your forked repo and monitor your build Step 3: Once the pipeline completes, verify your assets were deployed to AWS and F5 XC Step 4:Check your Terraform Outputs for XC and verify your app is available by navigating to the FQDN API Discovery andSecurity Dashboards: After leaving the Brewz test app deployed for a while we can start to see the API graph form. The F5 XC WAAP platform learns the schema structure of the API by analyzing sampled request data, then reverse-engineering the schema to generates an OpenAPI spec. The platform validates what is deploy versus what is discovered and tags any Shadow APIs that are found. We can also check the dashboards for any attacks that may have occurred while we were waiting for discovery to finish. The internet being what it is, it didn't take long for the platform to protect us against some attacks. Deployment Teardown: Step 1:From your deployment branch check out a branch for the destroy workflow using the following naming convention xc-nic destroy branch: destroy-xcapi-nic Step 2: Push your destroy branch to the forked repo Step 3: Back in GitHub, navigate to the Actions tab of your forked repo and monitor your build Step 4:Once the pipeline completes, verify your assets were destroyed Conclusion: In this article we have shown how to utilize the F5 Hybrid Security Architectures GitHub repo and CI/CD pipeline to deploy a tiered security architecture utilizing F5 XC WAAP and NGINX Ingress Controller to protect a test API running in AWS EKS. While the code and security policies deployed are generic and not inclusive of all use-cases, they can be used as a steppingstone for deploying F5 based hybrid architectures in your own environments. Workloads are increasingly deployed across multiple diverse environments and application architectures. Organizations need the ability to protect their essential applications regardless of deployment or architecture circumstances. Equally important is the need to deploy these protections with the same flexibility and speed as the apps they protect. With the F5 WAF portfolio, coupled with DevSecOps principles, organizations can deploy and maintain industry-leading security without sacrificing the time to value of their applications. Not only can Edge and Shift Left principles exist together, but they can also work in harmony to provide a more effective security solution. Article Series: F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Intro - One WAF Engine, Total Flexibility) F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 1 - F5's Distributed Cloud WAF and BIG-IP Advanced WAF) F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 2 - F5's Distributed Cloud WAF and NGINX App Protect WAF) F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 3 - F5 XC API Protection and NGINX Ingress Controller) F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 4 - F5 XC BOT and DDoS Defense and BIG-IP Advanced WAF) F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 5 - F5 XC, BIG-IP APM, CIS, and NGINX Ingress Controller) For further information or to get started: F5 Distributed Cloud Platform (Link) F5 Distributed Cloud WAAP Services (Link) F5 Distributed Cloud WAAP YouTube series (Link) F5 Distributed Cloud WAAP Get Started (Link)F5 Hybrid Security Architectures (Part 2 - F5's Distributed Cloud WAF and NGINX App Protect WAF)
Here in this example solution, we will be using Terraform to deploy an AWS Elastic Kubernetes Service cluster running the Arcadia Finance test web application serviced by F5 NGINX Kubernetes Ingress Controller and protected by NGINX App Protect WAF. We will supplement this with F5 Distributed Cloud Web App and API Protection to provide complimentary security at the edge. Everything will be tied together using GitHub Actions for CI/CD and Terraform Cloud to maintain state.F5 Hybrid Security Architectures: One WAF Engine, Total Flexibility (Intro)
Layered security, we have been told for years that the most effective security strategy is composed of multiple, loosely coupled or independent layers of security controls. A WAF fits snuggly into the technical security controls area and has long been known as an essential piece of application security. What if we take this further and apply the layered approach directly to our WAF deployment? The F5 Hybrid Security Architectures explores this approach utilizing F5's best in class WAF products.Access Troubleshooting: BIG-IP APM OIDC integration
Introduction Troubleshooting Access use cases can be challenging due to the interconnected components used to achieve such use cases. A simple example for Active Directory authentication can go through below challenges, DNS resolution of Domain Controller (DC) configured. Reachability between F5 and DC. Communication ports used. Domain account privileges. Looking at the issue of non-working Active Directory (AD) authentication is a complex task, yet looking at each component to verify the functionality is much easier and shows output the influence further troubleshooting actions. Implementation and troubleshooting We discussed the implementation of OpenID Connect over here Let's discuss here how we can troubleshoot issues in OIDC implementation, here's a summary of the main points we are checking Role Troubleshooting main points OAuth Authorization Server DNS resolution for the authentication destination. Routing setup to the authentication system. Authentication configurations and settings. Scope settings. Token signing and settings. OAuth Client DNS resolution for the authorization server. Routing setup. Token settings. Authorization attributes and parameters. OAuth Resource Server Token settings. Scope settings Looking at the main points, you can see the common areas we need to check while troubleshooting OAuth / OIDC solutions, below are the troubleshooting approach we are following, Check the logs. APM logging provides a comprehensive set of logs, the main logs to be checked apm, ltm and tmm. DNS resolution and check DNS resolver settings. Routing setup. Authentication methods settings. OAuth settings and parameters. Check the logs The logs are your true friends when it comes to troubleshooting. We start by creating debug logging profile Overview > Event logs > Setting. Select the target Access Policy to apply the debug profile. Case 1: Connection reset after authentication In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 but connection resets at this point. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. From the below logs we can see the logon was successful but somehow the Authorization code wasn’t detected. One main reason would be mismatched settings between Auth server and Client configurations. In our setup I’m using provider flow type as Hybrid and format code-idtoken. Local Time 2024-06-11 06:47:48 Log Message /Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1:Common:204adb19: Session variable 'session.logon.last.result' set to '1' Partition Common Local Time 2024-06-11 06:47:49 Log Message /Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1:Common:204adb19: Authorization code not found. Partition Common Checking back the configuration to validate the needed flow type: adjust flow type at the provider settings to beAuthorization Code instead of Hybrid. Case 2: Expired JWT Keys In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 with Access denied. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID from Access > Overview. From the below logs we can see the logon was successful but somehow the Authorization code wasn’t detected. One main reason can be the need to rediscover JWT keys. Local Time 2024-06-11 06:51:06 Log Message /Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1:Common:848f0568: Session variable 'session.oauth.client.last.errMsg' set to 'None of the configured JWK keys match the received JWT token, JWT Header: eyJhbGciOiJSUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6ImMzYWJlNDEzYjIyNjhhZTk3NjQ1OGM4MmMxNTE3OTU0N2U5NzUyN2UiLCJ0eXAiOiJKV1QifQ' Partition Common The action to be taken would be to rediscover the JWT keys if they are automatic or add the new one manually. Head toAccess ›› Federation : OAuth Client / Resource Server : Provider Select the created provider. Click Discover to fetch new keys from provider Save and apply the new policies settings. Case 3: OAuth Client DNS resolver failure In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 with Access denied. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. From the below logs we can see the logon was successful but somehow the Authorization code wasn’t detected. Another reason for such behavior can be the DNS failure to reach to OAuth provider to validate JWT keys. Local Time 2024-06-12 19:36:12 Log Message /Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1:Common:fb5d96bc: Session variable 'session.oauth.client.last.errMsg' set to 'HTTP error 503, DNS lookup failed' Partition Common Checking DNS resolver Network ›› DNS Resolvers : DNS Resolver List Validate resolver config. is correct. Check route to DNS server Network ›› Routes Note, DNS resolver uses TMM traffic routes not the management plane system routing. Case 4: Token Mismatch In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 with Access denied. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. We will find the logs showing Bearer token is received yet no token enabled at the client / resource server connections. Local Time 2024-06-21 07:25:12 Log Message /Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs:Common:c224c941: Session variable 'session.oauth.client./Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs_oauthServer_f5_local_provider.token_type' set to 'Bearer' Partition Common Local Time 2024-06-21 07:25:12 Log Message /Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs:Common:c224c941: Session variable 'session.oauth.scope./Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs_oauthServer_f5_local_provider.errMsg' set to 'Token is not active' Partition Common We need to make sure client and resource server have JWT token enabled instead of opaque and proper JWT token is selected. Case 5: Audience mismatch In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 with Access denied. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. We will find the logs stating incorrect or unmatched audience. Local Time 2024-06-23 21:32:42 Log Message /Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs:Common:42ef6c51: Session variable 'session.oauth.scope.last.errMsg' set to 'Audience not found : Claim audience= f5local JWT_Config Audience=' Partition Common Case 6: Scope mismatch In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users receive authorization error with wrong scope. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. Scope name is mentioned in the logs, in this case I named it “wrongscope” You will see scope includes openid string, this is because we have openid enabled. Change the scope to the one configured at the provider side. Local Time 2024-06-24 06:20:28 Log Message /Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1:Common:edacbe31:/Common/oidc_google_t1.app/oidc_google_t1_act_oauth_client_0_ag: OAuth: Request parameter 'scope=openid wrongscope' Partition Common Case 7: Incorrect JWT Signature In this case the below is the connection sequence, User accessing through F5 acting as Client + RS. Users are redirected to OAuth provider for authentication. User is redirected back to F5 with Access denied. Troubleshooting steps: Checking logs by clicking the session ID fromAccess > Overview. We will find the logs showing Bearer token is received yet no token enabled at the client / resource server connections. Local Time 2024-06-21 07:25:12 Log Message /Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs:Common:c224c941: Session variable 'session.oauth.scope./Common/f5_local_client_rs.app/f5_local_client_rs_oauthServer_f5_local_provider.errMsg' set to 'Token is not active' Partition Common When trying to renew the JWT key we see this error in the GUI. An error occurred: Error in processing URL https://accounts.google.com/.well-known/openid-configuration. The message is - javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException: sun.security.validator.ValidatorException: PKIX path building failed: sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to find valid certification path to requested target We need at this step to validate the used CA bundle and if we need to allow the trust of expired or self-signed JWT tokens. General issues In addition to the listed cases above, we have some general issues: DNS failure at client side not able to reach whether the F5 virtual server or OAuth provider to provide authentication information. In this case, please verify DNS configurations and Network setup on the client machine. Validate HTTP / SSL / TCP profiles at the virtual server are correctly configured. Related Content DNS Resolver Overview BIG-IP APM deployments using OAuth/OIDC with Microsoft Azure AD may fail to authenticate OAuth and OpenID Connect - Made easy with Access Guided Configurations templates Request and validate OAuth / OIDC tokens with APM F5 APM OIDC with Azure Entra AD Configuring an OAuth setup using one BIG-IP APM system as an OAuth authorization server and another as the OAuth clientSimplify Network Segmentation for Hybrid Cloud
Introduction Enterprises have always had the need to maintain separate development and production environments. Operational efficiency, reduction of blast radius, security and compliance are generally the common objectives behind separating these environments. By dividing networks into smaller, isolated segments, organizations can enhance security, optimize performance, and ensure regulatory compliance. This article demonstrates a practical strategy for implementing network segmentation in modern multicloud environments that also connect on-prem infrastructure. This uses F5 Distributed Cloud (F5 XC) services to connect and secure network segments in cloud environments like Amazon Web Services (AWS) and on-prem datacenters. Need for Segmentation Network segmentation is critical for managing complex enterprise environments. Traditional methods like Virtual Routing and Forwarding (VRFs) and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) have long been used to create isolated network segments in on-prem setups. F5 XC ensures segmentation in environments like AWS and it can extend the same segmentation to on-prem environments. These techniques separate traffic, enhance security, and improve network management by preventing unauthorized access and minimizing the attack surface. Scenario Overview Our scenario depicts an enterprise with three different environments (prod, dev, and shared services) extended between on-prem and cloud. A 3rd party entity requires access to a subset of the enterprise's services. This article, covers the following two networking segmentation use-cases: Hybrid Cloud Transit Extranet (servicing external 3 rd party partners/customers) Hybrid Cloud Transit Consider an enterprise with three distinct environments: Production (Prod), Development (Dev), and Shared Services. Each environment requires strict isolation to ensure security and performance. Using F5 XC Cloud Connect, we can assign each VPC a network segment effectively isolating the VPC’s. Segments in multiple locations (or VPC’s) can traverse F5 XC to reach distant locations whether in another cloud environment or on-prem. Network segments are isolated by default, for example, our Prod segment cannot access Shared. A segment connector is needed to allow traffic between Prod and Shared. The following diagram shows the VPC segments, ensuring complete "ships in the night" isolation between environments. In this setup, Prod, Dev, and Shared Services environments operate independently and are completely isolated from one another at the control plane level. This ensures that any issues or attacks in one environment do not affect the others. Customer Requirement: Shared Services Access Many enterprises deploy common services across their organization to support internal workloads and applications. Some examples include DHCP, DNS, NTP, and NFS, services that need to be accessible to both Prod and Dev environments while keeping Prod and Dev separate from each other. Segment Connectors is a method to allow communication between two isolated segments by leaking the routes between the source and destination segments. It is important to note that segment connector can be of type Direct or SNAT. Direct allows bidirectional communication between segments whereas the SNAT option allows unidirectional communication from the source to the destination. Extending Segmentation to On-Premises Enterprises already use segmented networks within their on-premises infrastructure. Extending this segmentation to AWS involves creating similar isolated segments in the cloud and establishing secure communication channels. F5 XC allows you to easily extend this segmentation from on-prem to the cloud regardless of the underlay technology. In this scenario, communication between the on-premises Prod segment and its cloud counterpart is seamless, and the same also applies for the Dev segment. Meanwhile Dev and Prod stay separate ensuring that existing security and isolation is preserved across the hybrid environment. Extranet In this scenario an external entity (customer/partner) needs access to a few applications within our Prod segment. There are two different ways to enable this access, Network-centric and App-centric. Let’s refer to the external entity as Company B. In order to connect Company B we generally need appropriate cloud credentials, but Company B will not share their cloud credentials with us. To solve this problem, F5 XC recommends using AWS STS:AssumeRole functionality whereby Company B creates an AWS IAM Role that trusts F5 XC with the minimum privileges necessary to configure Transit Gateway (TGW) attachments and TGW route table entries to extend access to the F5 XC network or network segments. Section 1 – Network-centric Extranet Many times, partners & customers need to access a unique subset of your enterprise’s applications. This can be achieved with F5 XC’s dedicated network segments and segment connectors. With a segment connector for the external and prod network segments, we can give Company B access to the required HTTP service without gaining broader access to other non-Prod segments. Locking Down with Firewall Policies We can implement a Zero Trust firewall policy to lock down access from the external segment. By refining these policies, we ensure that third-party consumers can only access the services they are authorized to use. Our firewall policy on the CE only allows access from the external segment to the intended application on TCP/80 in Prod. [ec2-user@ip-10-150-10-146 ~]$ curl --head 10.1.10.100 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: nginx/1.24.0 (Ubuntu) Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 20:50:30 GMT Content-Type: text/html Content-Length: 615 Last-Modified: Wed, 22 May 2024 21:35:11 GMT Connection: keep-alive ETag: "664e650f-267" Accept-Ranges: bytes [ec2-user@ip-10-150-10-146 ~]$ ping -O 10.1.10.100 PING 10.1.10.100 (10.1.10.100) 56(84) bytes of data. no answer yet for icmp_seq=1 no answer yet for icmp_seq=2 no answer yet for icmp_seq=3 ^C --- 10.1.10.100 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 3153ms After applying the new policies, we confirm that the third-party access is restricted to the intended services only, enhancing security and compliance. This demonstrates how F5 Distributed Cloud services enable networking segmentation across on-prem and cloud environments, with granular control over security policies applied between the segments. Section 2 - App-centric Extranet In the scenario above, Company B can directly access one or more services in Prod with a segment connector and we’ve locked it down with a firewall policy. For the App-centric method, we’ll only publish the intended services that live in Prod to the external segment. App-centric connectivity is made possible without a segment connector by using load balancers within App Connect that target the application within the Prod segment and advertises its VIP address to the external segment. The following illustration shows how to configure each component in the load balancer. Visualization of Traffic Flows The visualization flow analysis tool in the F5 XC Console shows traffic flows between the connected environments. By analyzing these flows, particularly between third-party consumers and the Prod environment, we can identify any unintended access or overreach. The following diagram is for a Network-centric connection flow: This following diagram shows an App-centric connection flow using the load balancer: Product Feature Demo Conclusion Effective network segmentation is a cornerstone of secure and efficient cloud environments. We’ve discussed how F5 XC enables hybrid cloud transit and extranet communication. Extranet can be done with either a network centric or app-centric deployment. F5 XC is an end to end platform that manages and orchestrates end-to-end segmentation and security in hybrid-cloud environments. Enterprises can achieve comprehensive segmentation, ensuring isolation, secure access, and compliance. The strategies and examples provided demonstrate how to implement and manage segmentation across hybrid environments, catering to diverse requirements and enhancing overall network security. Additional Resources More features and guidance are provided in the comprehensive guide below, where showing exactly how you can use the power and flexibility of F5 Distributed Cloud and Cloud Connect to deliver a Network-centric approach with a firewall and an App-centric approach with a load balancer. Create and manage segmented networks inyour own cloud and on-prem environments, and achieve the following benefits: Ability to isolate environments within AWS Ability to extend segmentation to on-prem environments Ability to connect external partners or customers to a specific segment Use Enhanced Firewall Policies to limit access and reduce the blast radius Enhance the compliance and regulatory requirements by isolating sensitive data and systems Visualize and monitor the traffic flows and policies across segments and network domains Workflow Guide - Secure Network Fabric (Multi-Cloud Networking) YouTube: Using network segmentation for hybrid-cloud and extranet with F5 Distributed Cloud Services DevCentral:Secure Multicloud Networking Article Series GitHub: S-MCN Use-case Playbooks (Console, Automation) for F5 Distributed Cloud Customers F5.com: Product Information Product Documentation Network Segmentation Cloud Connect Network Segment Connectors App Security App Networking CE Site ManagementConfigure Generic Webhook Alert Receiver using F5 Distributed Cloud Platform
Generic Webhook Alerts feature in F5 Distributed Cloud (F5 XC) gives feasibility to easily configure and send Alert notifications related to Application Infrastructure (IaaS) to specified URL receiver. F5 XC SaaS console platform sends alert messages to web servers to receive as soon as the events gets triggered.
