asm
91 TopicsMigration from physical Hardware to R series
I have a physical hardware box 4000s in which there are 4 X 1 gig interfaces in a trunk. In new r series device r4600 we have trunk with two 25 gig interfaces. Can I copy the UCS from old device and load it on the new device using no license no platform check command ? Anyone has done this type of migration, please let me know the steps you followed.35Views0likes3CommentsIrule for Host block with custom ASM violation
Dears, I have following scenarios, 1. if Traffic from Internal user/IP --- >Allow connection 2. Traffic from internet 2.1) Block access only on Host name ( URL ), That is -----> https://XYZ.com 2.2) Allow access to URI's, Thats is ------- > https://XYZ.com/abc or https://XYZ.com/* I tried multiple way and find some solution but its not working. Its great if some one helps here when HTTP_REQUEST { set reqBlock 0 if {[string tolower [HTTP::host]] eq "XYZ.Google.com" && [IP::addr [IP::client_addr] equals "10.0.0.0/8"]} { log local0. "[IP::client_addr] triggered geo" set reqBlock 1 } } when ASM_REQUEST_DONE { if {$reqBlock == 1} { ASM::raise VIOLATION_URL_GEOLOCATION } }43Views0likes1CommentF5 ASM Response logging show different timezone from Request logging
Dear All Respected Members, I have a question on f5 AWAF response logging. I am setting up a WAF policy to block attacks and monitor all traffic to and from the real servers. I can see the logs generated for both request & response, but it shown incorrect log timezone for responses. BIG-IP, real server and client are set local time zone GMT+7, but the repone logs are GMT. I have double checked timezone on all devices are configure correctly. Could you advise me what is the root cause and how to fix it? Thanks.136Views0likes2CommentsWAF for APM Oauth Authorization VS
Hi, We are testing the using of F5 as a OAuth Authorization Server and also a Resource Server. We have a WAF policy attached the VS representing of the Resource Server, which has an IIS server behind it. Since VS of the Auth Server will only utilize APM capabilities and won't actually have any application/web server behind it, I'm wondering if it's advised to add a WAF policy for this VS. I was told it's not necessary but I find it odd, since attackers can still try to attack the F5 itself. Any thoughts?Solved174Views0likes7CommentsHA Configuration (One in primary and One in DR)
Hi folks, I currently have HA pair (active/passive) in a primary data center and we are bringing up a DR. wondering can I split up the HA pair (One in primary and One in DR) and continue to have HA with utilizing different subnets? We are using multiple IPSEC tunnels to connect the sites so we are still working on whether we can extend subnets but if we can't I wanted to ask if different subnets are possible. Thank you any info is appreciated43Views0likes4CommentsASM Sync Between 2 Data Centers
Hi Folks, Any one tried to sync ASM configuration between 2 data centers successfully? my current scenario is, i have HA pair (active/passive) in data center A and another HA pair (active/passive) in data center B and need to sync the the ASM configuration between the 2 data centers.Solved110Views0likes10CommentsBig-IP ASM automatically removes my hostname
, but I don't see the violation reaching the threshold of 100. Hello everyone, Recently, my service has encountered an issue. In the evening, while everything was running normally, I received a block warning from ASM. Upon checking, I found that my hostname was automatically removed from the policy by ASM. I am using fully automatic as per this link: https://my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K000134503. However, the problem is that when I checked for violations, I did not see any violations related to violations="Illegal host name." So, why did it reach the threshold of 100 and remove my hostname? Could this be a bug? I checked that there were no accept suggestions at that time, only violations="Illegal repeated parameter name," which I do not think is the issue. Thank you.145Views1like11CommentsBypass "Bad unescape" in Body POST (ASM, POST, JSON)
Here the Block. As you can see is "%" is detected without encoding meaning. This is normal since the "%" is in the Body of the post as JSON data (see below) Of course if I disable the "Bad unescape" in " Learning and Blocking Settings" it works, but my Goal is to bypass using rule on parameter or similar, till now without success. Does anyone have a solution ? ======= JSON on POST Dody Request =======================72Views0likes11Comments