cookie
65 TopicsHow to generate the persistence cookie with an iRule
Problem this snippet solves: When you configure a cookie persistence profile to use the HTTP Cookie Insert or HTTP Cookie Rewrite method, the BIG-IP system inserts a cookie into the HTTP response. The cookie value contains the encoded IP address and port of the destination server. Exemple of a cookie value : 1677787402.36895.0000 (See SOL6917 for more information about this topic) Let's assume that you want your pool member to receive a copy of this cookie value in an HTTP header. Because for example you want your application to forge an url where the cookie value is in a GET parameter. (NOTE : I cannot modify the behavior of the application, I can only play with headers) Retrieving the cookie value is pretty easy with iRule : [HTTP::cookie value $cookie_name] But you'll notice that there is a little issue with this feature: when you are a new visitor, the persistence cookie is inserted in the HTTP response ... Meaning that for the very first hit made by the visitor, there will be NO cookie value to retrieve ... In my scenario it was an issue to miss this cookie value on the first hit, so I had to come up with a solution to forge the cookie value based on pool member IP and port when the persistence cookie is missing. I chose to adapt the code found here and there (thanks !) EDIT : Well I figured out that if you are not using a default route-domain the persistence cookie value will be different (see https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K6917 ) Here is the alternative code bloc to use IPv4 non-default route domains: set ADDR "[format %02x $a][format %02x $b][format %02x $c][format %02x $d]" set PORT [LB::server port] set COOKIE "rd2o00000000000000000000ffff${ADDR}o${PORT}" How to use this snippet: To summarize what the iRule does : if the persistence cookie doesn't exist (most likely because it's the very first hit), then calculate it from member IP and PORT (it obviously has to be after the "When LB_SELECTED" statement) ; else just read the existing cookie. You can set the $cookie_name parameter manually, or let the iRule identify it Code : when LB_SELECTED { #set cookie_name SERVERID # following function could determine persistence cookie name being used if not manually set by the previous line if {not [info exists cookie_name]} { if { [set cookie_name [PROFILE::persist mode cookie cookie_name]] eq "" } { set cookie_name "BIGipServer[getfield [LB::server pool] "/" 3]" } #Default cookie name requires the getfield "/" 3 purge otherwise it's /Common/pool_name } if { [set COOKIE [HTTP::cookie value $cookie_name]] == "" } { scan [LB::server addr] {%d.%d.%d.%d} a b c d set ADDR [expr { $a + $b * 256 + $c * 65536 + $d * 16777216 }] set PORT [ntohs [LB::server port]] set COOKIE "${ADDR}.${PORT}.0000" ## Following bloc must be used instead if you are using non-default route domains, see K6917 #set ADDR "[format %02x $a][format %02x $b][format %02x $c][format %02x $d]" #set PORT [LB::server port] #set COOKIE "rd2o00000000000000000000ffff${ADDR}o${PORT}" ######### unset a b c d ADDR PORT #log local0. "$cookie_name = $COOKIE created for [HTTP::uri]" } else { #log local0. "$cookie_name = $COOKIE already exists for [HTTP::uri]" } HTTP::header insert X-F5-persist $COOKIE } Tested this on version: 11.52.4KViews2likes1CommentChange default cookie insert name
Is there any possibility to change the default cookie name (BIGipServer) for a cookie insert persistence profile? We want to use a standard cookie insert profile across several virtual servers, but avoiding the name "BIGipServer". But we still need the "" as a dynamic variable. Is there some variable syntax available for the cookie name field or can we modify the default "BIGipServer" string? Or is this somewhere hardcoded in the OS? Thank you! Regards Stefan 🙂657Views1like5CommentsIncreased Security With First Party Cookies
HTTP cookies are an essential part of many web based applications, useful for tracking session and state information. But they can also be exploited to leak information to third party sites using a method known as Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF). A CSRF attack takes advantage of the web browser behavior which results in cookies being sent to third party sites when a page contains mixed content. This results in cross-site information leakage, and depending on the content of the cookies, could provide an attacker with information to hijack a user session. SameSite Attribute As of this writing, there is a Internet draft standard for directing clients to only send ‘first party’ cookies. In a nutshell, the standard defines a new, backwards-compatible attribute for the Set-Cookie header named SameSite. When the SameSite attribute is present, compliant browsers will only send that cookie with requests where the requested resource and the top-level browsing context match the cookie. This becomes another layer of a “defense in depth” strategy, mitigating CSRF and cross-site script including (XSSI) attacks. SameSite is supported in recent Chrome and Firefox browsers. SameSite can be specified alone, or with explicit values “Strict” or “Lax”, corresponding to differing levels of lock-down. Specifying SameSite can increase security, but it is not appropriate for all applications. One example would be “mash-up” applications, those which intentionally pull and embed content from different sites, may require cross-site cookies to function correctly. Also, some single sign-on features may require cross-context authentication that involves cookies. So how can you secure your apps? Big IP provides 3 ways to add SameSite attribute to Set-Cookie headers, two of which are described below: iRules and LTM Policy. Mentioned in another article, the Application Security module also provides a setting to enable SameSite. iRule to add SameSite attribute Here is iRule which can handle multiple Set-Cookie headers in a response. If a Set-Cookie header already has SameSite attribute present, it is passed through unmodified. This allows an administrator to set a baseline security level, say by specifying “SameSite=Lax” in an iRule, but allows for individual apps to control their security level by generating headers with their own Set-Cookie header, with say “SameSite=Strict”. when HTTP_RESPONSE { # Set-Cookie header can occur multiple times, treat as list set num [HTTP::header count Set-Cookie] if {$num > 0} { foreach set_cookie [HTTP::header values Set-Cookie] { # only modify if header does not have SameSite attribute set foundSameSite [string match -nocase "*SameSite*" $set_cookie ] if {[expr {!$foundSameSite} ]} { set set_cookie [concat $set_cookie "; SameSite"] } # collect modified and unmodified values in list newcookies lappend newcookies $set_cookie } if {$num == 1} { # overwrite existing HTTP::header Set-Cookie [lindex $newcookies 0] } else { # remove and replace HTTP::header remove Set-Cookie foreach set_cookie $newcookies { HTTP::header insert Set-Cookie $set_cookie } } } } LTM Policy Below is a sample LTM Policy which will tag “; SameSite” to the end of a Set-Cookie header that doesn’t have one already. One limitation to be aware of is that there can be multiple Set-Cookie headers in an HTTP response, and LTM policy can only replace the last one. Here is a screenshot from the GUI showing an LTM Policy rule which Here is the resulting policy as it would appear in the /config/bigip.conf configuration file: ltm policy first-party-cookies { requires { http } rules { r1 { actions { 0 { http-header response replace name Set-Cookie value "tcl:[HTTP::header Set-Cookie]; SameSite" } } conditions { 0 { http-header response name Set-Cookie not contains values { SameSite } } } } } status published strategy first-match }8.2KViews1like16Comments