expandsSubcollections and filtering in F5 SDK
Hello, I need to use the F5 BIGIP SDK to pull all the firewall policies from a partition along with their respective expanded rules. I wrote the following code: policies = f5_manager.mgmt.tm.security.firewall.policy_s.get_collection( requests_params={ "params": f"$filter=partition eq {partition_name}&expandSubcollections=true" }, ) If i only want to use expandSubcollections=true or only the filter it works as expected. However, when I try to combine them it doesn't expand the results anymore. Has anyone encountered this before? Thanks!
iRule checking multiple "active_members" help
Hi All, I'm currently building on-top of a couple of iRules I developed a while ago for our maintenance page - I'm extending the behaviour to also trigger a site failure page if everything fails (non-controlled take-down) To do this I need to check the state of TWO pools -I would have assumed that this would be quite trivial with a simple logic operator... however I get the following error when attempting to Apply the iRule to a Virtual-server (so its already passed the first set of validation when saving the irule initially): **_01070151:3: Rule [/Common/OopsPage2] error: Unable to find pool (Pool2) referenced at line 3: [active_members "Pool2"]_** I've tried a couple of variations with different parenthesise combinations: if { [active_members "Pool1" ] < 1 and [active_members "Pool2" ] > 0 } { AND if { ([active_members "Pool1" ] < 1) and ([active_members "Pool2" ] > 0) } { Can someone spot the rookie mistake that I'm making? This works if I specify a single Pool to check. I am developing on LTM 11.1.0... I might also try this on 10.2.3 Thanks in advance for your help... Regards, Patrick
11.4 iapp namespace
Hi, I'm developing some iApp templates based on the f5.http. I need to be able to let the user decide if a specific pool member is enabled or disabled when the iApp is deployed. I already added in the presentation section a choice field to enable or disable the member: table members { editchoice addr display "large" tcl { package require iapp 1.0.0 return [iapp::get_items ltm node] } string port display "small" required default "80" validator "PortNumber" string connection_limit display "small" required default "0" validator "NonNegativeNumber" optional ( lb_method == "ratio-member" || lb_method == "ratio-node" || lb_method == "ratio-session" || lb_method == "ratio-least-connections-member" || lb_method == "ratio-least-connections-node" || lb_method == "dynamic-ratio-member" || lb_method == "dynamic-ratio-node" ) { string ratio default "1" validator "NonNegativeNumber" display "small" } optional ( options.advanced == "yes" && use_pga == "yes" ) { string priority default "0" required validator "NonNegativeNumber" display "small" } optional ( options.advanced == "yes" ) { choice state display "xlarge" default "enabled" } } The pool is configured with this statement in the template: array set pool_arr { 1,0 { [iapp::conf create ltm pool ${app}_pool \ [iapp::substa pool_ramp_pga_arr($advanced,$do_slow_ramp,$do_pga)] \ [iapp::substa pool_lb_queue_arr($advanced)] \ [iapp::substa monitor_arr($new_pool,$new_monitor,$advanced)] \ [iapp::pool_members $::pool__members]] \ [iapp::conf modify ltm pool ${app}_pool \ ] } 0,0 { [expr { $::net__server_mode ne "tunnel" ? \ $::pool__pool_to_use : $::pool__pool_to_use_wom }] } * { none translate-address disabled } } As the pool members are configured with the "iapp::pool_members" routine, it would be best if this configures the state of the member too. I haven't found the source of this routine so i don't know if it is capable of doing this. Is there any documentation on the iapp:: namespace and it's source code? If the routine is not capable of setting the state - any ideas on how to configure the member state besides iterating over the $::pool__members variable? Greetings, EricProtecting against DDoS attack
Dear Community, I need help from application security experts and seasoned web developers. We are getting DDoS attacks on the following requests. This attack is targetting our SMS gateway; resulting in triggerig thousands of SMSs. Please inform which kind of protections we can introduce in application level / application code level to protect against this DDoS attack. DDoS Request Sample: POST xyz.com/api/otp/asdf HTTP/1.1 Host: xyz.com Content-Length: 32 Sec-Ch-Ua: " Not A;Brand";v="99", "Chromium";v="90" Accept: application/json, text/plain, */* Authorization: *********** Accept-Language: ar Sec-Ch-Ua-Mobile: ?0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/90.0.4430.93 Safari/537.36 Content-Type: application/json Origin: http://abc.com Sec-Fetch-Site: same-site Sec-Fetch-Mode: cors Sec-Fetch-Dest: empty Referer: http://abc.com Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Connection: close {"mobileNumber":"123456789"} Warm RegardsPreventing DDoS attacks on SMS URL
Dear Community, I am facing DDoS attacks on one of our application. The attacker is sending hundred of requests to a URL, which is consuming all of our SMS quota. The attack is originating from multiple IPs. Please inform how I can protect this application API from this kind of DDoS attack from appliation code level. I need help from application security experts and web developers. https://abc.com is frontend & xyz.com is backend api Sample of DDoS reqeust: POST /asdf/service/sendmobilecode HTTP/1.1 Host: xyz.com Authorization: *********** User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/90.0.4430.93 Safari/537.36 Content-Type: application/json Origin: https://abc.com Referer: https://abc.com/ {"number":"91234567890"} Kind Regards
How to develop a second factor authentication plugin/extension?
Very new to BIG-IP I am trying to port an extension for second factor authentication written for PingFederate. There I have to create a jar and deploy it in PF. Then I can login as admin and configure it as a policy: Login using AD, on success, trigger my plugin which does the OTP and then allow access to the resource. How do I do something similar in BIG-IP? Is APM > AAA Servers the right way to do this?Spilt DNS resolution for Dev and Prod domains in APM (portal access)
Hi All I have an issue where a client has a DEV environment and a Production environment, both using the same Domain Space. They have an issue when using APM Portal resources and DNS lookups. Basically they have 2 VIPs set up, one for Dev and one for production but the issue occurs when the F5 needs to do a lookup for the portal resources. The F5 can be configured with multiple DNS servers but the device will always query one DNS server (most likely the first one) for a DNS resolution, and cant distinguish if it should return a DEV address or a portal address. The long and short is that when a client accesses the dev VIP i want any DNS requests to go to the DEV DNS servers and all other DNS requests go to the Prod DNS servers. I tried looking down the route of configuring a DNS VIP and pointing the F5's DNS servers at that, but all the requests are coming from the F5 so we can't make a decision based on client source address, and all the DNS requests are the same URL/domain so we cant make decisions on that either! They dont have GTM but im not sure that would help in this situation either. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Regards Phil