Is it possible to select ASM BoT profile from irule?
Hi. . Is it possible to select BoT profile from irule? . Concept is we have different set of IP which need to allow "some" BoT type. That why we can't use whitelist IP in BoT profile because it will allow all BoT type. So We want to use iRule to check if it IP A > use BoT profile which have some exception, but if all other IP > use normally BoT profile. . when HTTP_REQUEST { # Check IP and select BoT profile from that if { [IP::client_addr] eq "A" } { ASM::enable allow_some_bot_profile } else { ASM::enable normally_bot_profile } } ps. I didn't see any document about how to select BoT profile. So I'm not sure if ASM::enable can do that.F5 AWAF/ASM ASM_RESPONSE_VIOLATION event seem to not trigger on 17.1.x
Hey Everyone, The F5 AWAF/ASM ASM_RESPONSE_VIOLATION event seem to not trigger on 17.1.x. I have enabled irules support the waf policy and I tested in Normal and Compatibility mode but no luck. The other events trigger without an issue. I created 2 custom signatures for response and request match and request match one has no issues so it seems a bug to me. This can be easily tested with the below irule that logs to /var/log/asm when ASM_REQUEST_DONE { log local3. "test request" } when ASM_RESPONSE_VIOLATION { log local3. "test response" } The custom response signature is in the policy to just trigger alarm. I tried string or regex match " (?i)failed " PCRE-style as F5 15.x and up are using this regex style.F5 AWAF/ASM custom violation not seen in the session tracking Delayed Blocking
Hello Everyone, I created a custom violation in AWAF/ASM and I see that I can't use it on the Session tracking "Delay Blocking" feature as I think it has only the predefined violations. I planned to raise this violation when I trigger 2 custom signatures. I have a workaround iRule table command but I just wanted to check.
F5 AWAF Policy learning phase opinion
Hello, Hope you are doing well! I am new to f5 AWAF and am wondering on what is the recommended way to protect and app published on the internet, afaik in the learning phase with transparent mode or blocking mode with staging enabled the attack won't be blocked. Since testing the app locally is not always an option, Is it optimal to set the policy into blocking mode/Enforce/disable learn only for the high attack signatures, at the same time i put other entities into staging (Cookies, URL, parameters, ...) with automatic policy building for learning ? What do you think ? at least i will be sure the high attack won't pass to the app. Thanks. Regards! Amine
F5 AWAF Bot Defense Whitelist
According to https://techdocs.f5.com/en-us/bigip-14-1-0/big-ip-asm-implementations-14-1-0/configuring-bot-defense.html, having whitelists can speed up access time to the website. Is it because WAF will not check those whitelisted URLs coming to the web site, thereby making it faster? (Faster when users access the web site because less traffic to be validated by WAF?)
Connection Reset
Hi guys I have a problem, I migrated one website for example test.local to F5 AWAF and everything was good but I have a problem, when I enabled the ASP in VS and next I requested to test.local/hangfire, the connection was reset and when I disabled the ASP in VS after that I can open test.local/hangfire do you have any suggestion? Thanks
F5 AWAF Data Guard
According to the online resources, the data guard features will mask response containing sensitive data or block the response. However, if the application itself displays the sensitive information which might be not from the response, will the sensitive information be masked or blocked?
