SNI Sites not taking correct certificate.
I have configured one VIP with two certificate aks.test.com aks4.test.com On SSL profile for aks.test.com i have enabled SNI feature and aks.test.com is working fine taking correct certificate (aks.test.com). but aks4.test.com having not secure error on browser and taking the certificate of (aks.test.com). Could someone please help what could be the issue in this case.
Disable HTTP2 profile from iRule?
Hi! We will implement HTTP2 since it's supported in version 12. There is one iRule assigned to VIP that requires SSL renegotiation. Renegotiation conflicts with HTTP2 and gives SPDY protocol error. This iRule asks for a client certificate from card reader for a specific URL and country. It's easy to select another SSL profile with renegotiation enabled for this specific country, but it would be better to use another SSL profile for this specific URI only. HTTP URI is not allowed within CLIENT_ACCEPTED, but we can live with disabling HTTP2 for a country if there is no way to accomplish this. The most important is to figure out how to disable HTTP2 profile on the VIP for this URL or country. I have not yet found a solution for this. WAM::disable is not working. Any help is highly appreciated because this is a blocker now for enabling HTTP2. iRule: Initialize the variables on new client tcp session. when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { set collecting 0 set renegtried 0 Find out country tag set CountryID "[whereis [IP::client_addr] country]" Use SSL profile with renegotiation enabled if {$CountryID eq "EE"} { SSL::profile with_renegitiation_enabled } } Runs for each new http request when HTTP_REQUEST { /player/identification/eid/start triggers client cert renegotiation if { $renegtried == 0 and [SSL::cert count] == 0 and (([HTTP::uri] starts_with "/player/identification/eid/start") || ([HTTP::uri] starts_with "/player/authentication/authentication/loginEid")) } { Collecting means buffering the request. The collection goes on until SSL::renegotiate occurs, which happens after the HTTP request has been received. The maximum data buffered by collect is 1-4 MB. WAM::disable HTTP::collect set collecting 1 SSL::cert mode request SSL::renegotiate } } After a handshake, we log that we have tried it. This is to prevent constant attempts to renegotiate the SSL session. I'm not sure of this feature; this may in fact be a mistake, but we can change it at any time. It is transparent if we do: the connections only work slower. It would, however, make BigIP detect inserted smartcards immediately. Right answer depends on the way the feature is used by applications. when CLIENTSSL_HANDSHAKE { if { $collecting == 1 } { set renegtried 1 Release allows the request processing to occur normally from this point forwards. The next event to fire is HTTP_REQUEST_SEND. HTTP::release } } Inject headers based on earlier renegotiations, if any. when HTTP_REQUEST_SEND { clientside { Security: reject any user-submitted headers by our magic names. HTTP::header remove "ID-EE-SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE" HTTP::header remove "ID-EE-SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE_FAILED" if certificate is available, send it. Otherwise, send a header indicating a failure, if we have already attempted a renegotiate. if { [SSL::cert count] > 0 } { log local0. "Client Certificate: [X509::subject [SSL::cert 0]]" HTTP::header insert "ID-EE-SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE" [X509::whole [SSL::cert 0]] } elseif { $renegtried == 1 } { This header has some debug value: if the FAILED header is not present, BigIP is probably not configured to do client certs at all. HTTP::header insert "ID-EE-SSL_CLIENT_CERTIFICATE_FAILED" "true" } } }
SSL client certificate LDAP Authentication Question
Hi all In a bid to try understand some of the lesser documented and possibly implemented features of LTM, I have been testing out the various authentication features LTM has to offer. I am at a point where one them - SSL client certificate LDAP authentication has left me a little stumped. I can get the feature to work at a basic level, that is, the client presents a certificate, the LTM extracts the username from the cert, performs bind to LDAP and authenticates the user successfully. What I wish to do now is ensure that the client is part of a specific AD group before granting permission to resources. I believe the *Group Base DN* and *Valid Groups* settings are what I need to focus on. However, regardless of what I enter here, I cannot get this to work. My thinking is that the Group Base DN should contain a value similar to this: CN=Sales,CN=Users,DC=company,DC=com Where 'Sales' is an AD group the users I wish to authenticate are part of. I then add the keyword 'Sales' to the Valid Groups box, for a final config like so: ltm auth ssl-cc-ldap LAB-SSL-LDAP-CONFIG { admin-dn CN=Administrator,CN=Users,DC=lab,DC=com admin-password group-base CN=Sales,CN=Users,DC=lab,DC=com servers { } user-base CN=Users,DC=lab,DC=com user-key sAMAccountName valid-groups { Sales } Yet, with this config it fails and the Wireshark trace I take doesn't actually provide much clue. In fact I can't even see the LTM attempt to query LDAP for the 'Sales' group. Any idea on where I'm going wrong? Has anyone tried this out successfully? Thanks
HTTPS LTM iRule for overloading a VIP - HTTPS web server internally not encrypting
Hi, I've used the articles on here to create a single VIP with an iRule to switch pools using the URL::host value, This has been working great for internal services that are HTTP. I'm trying to deploy one that is HTTPS internally and no matter what I try I can't seem to get the F5 and the web server to establish a TLS handshake. I've tried SSL server profiles, I've tried adding SSL::enable server commands and the web server gets a clear text GET request on port 443. when HTTP_REQUEST { log local0. "client=[IP::client_addr]:[TCP::client_port] host=[HTTP::host] uri=[HTTP::uri]" switch [string tolower [HTTP::host]] { "server1" { switch -glob -- [string tolower [HTTP::uri]] { "/stuff?*" { pool pool_Srv1 } default { reject } } } "server2" { switch -glob -- [string tolower [HTTP::uri]] { "/psp/*" - "/favicon.ico" { pool pool_Srv2 } "/" { HTTP::respond 302 Location "http://MainpageOnOtherServer" } "/apple-touch*" { reject } default { reject } } } "NewServer { log local0. "Is [HTTP::host] uri=[HTTP::uri]" HTTP::header insert "X-Forwarded-Proto" "https"; pool pool_NewSrv } default { reject } } } when SERVER_CONNECTED { switch [LB::server pool] { pool_NewSrv { SSL::enable serverside SSL::profile InternalTLS } default { SSL::disable serverside } } } Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks01070312:3: Invalid keyword 'ecdhe-ecdsaaes256- gcm-sha384' in ciphers list for profile
Hi Guys! Does anyone experience the same issue? We are experiencing SSL/TLS Vulnerabilities per our Security Team we need to apply the certain cipher configuration and it includes this string SHA384:ECDHE-ECDSAAES256- GCM-SHA384 however our F5 doesn't accept it. 01070312:3: Invalid keyword 'ecdhe-ecdsaaes256- gcm-sha384' in ciphers list for profile /Common/xxxxxx Thank you!TLS Client Authentication from Server SSL Profile
Hi all We have a requirement to enable an outbound (internet) flow from some internal servers. Sitting near the edge of the network is an LTM that will proxy the connection from the servers, and is required to then do TLS mutual authentication (client authentication) to the target server on the internet. In this setup the LTM is, from the internal server's point of view, the server, so we configure a Client SSL Profile. All good. Next the LTM is, from the target server's point of view, a client so we configure a Server SSL Profile. Unfortunately this is not working for us. In the Server SSL profile we have set the Certificate and Key, which is the identity cert of the LTM itself signed by a 3rd party CA using a Web Server template with Client Authentication Key Usage. The logs from the target server (Apache 2.4.7) show the following: [ssl:info] [pid 5260:tid 2999946048] [client 10.128.2.109:58181] AH02008: SSL library error 1 in handshake (server server.com:443) [ssl:info] [pid 5260:tid 2999946048] SSL Library Error: error:140880AE:SSL routines:SSL3_GET_CERT_VERIFY:missing verify message My limited understanding on TLS MA is that the client should send a Certificate Verify message that proves it owns the private key. It appears the LTM is not sending this message which could explain why it is failing. I've tested a similar setup in my lab but bypassed the LTM and sure enough a Windows client does indeed send the Certificate Verify message and the transaction is successful. Any ideas on this one? Thank you.
Question regarding the SSL/TLS cipher and Certificate
Hi Folks, I have two question regarding SSL/TLS cipher and Certificate. We used the same ssl profile with same cipher suite on two different F5 VSs, and we tested SSL/TLS by Qualys SSL Labs. But we saw the different report. One of the website got the A grade, but the other website got the B grade, because the webpage didn't use the forward secrecy cipher suite. Why do we get the discrepancy report ? The other question: There were several WAF or Load balancer on the same network chain to handle the same traffic for the same website. It was like there is a user send the HTTPS request through the several proxy device and final reach the website. Why the user got the certificate problem If one of the proxy which wasn't placed on the first gave the wrong ssl certificate ? Wouldn't the first proxy unit handling client side ssl handshake? Regards, Ding
F5 and STARTTLS
I am not able to find a way for the F5 (BIG-IP 11.6.0 Build 1.0.403 Hotfix HF1) to essentially proxy an SMTP connection inbound and outbound to/from our email gateway and establishing (or not) a TLS connection. I am looking for the opportunistic conversation to occur between the F5 and the backend email gateway. Going outbound, the email gateway would forward the email to the F5 and the F5 would query the receiving gateway to determine if it could do or responded properly to the STARTTLS conversation. Likewise, an incoming email toward our gateways - the F5 would establish (yes/no) if the sending gateway could do STARTTLS. Thanks very much.
Problem FTPS passive
Hello Everyone, For one of our customer, we have to deploy a FTPS server behind the F5. Here is my configuration of the VS : And here is my problem, The FTP behind the F5 is working great, I can connect to it and transfer a file with success. But where I have a problem is when the server has TLS turned on. First I tried to manage the certificate with the F5 (TLS is off on FTP server) so I created a SSL client profiles but it's not working : And when TLS is turned on onto the server but the certificate is not managed by the F5 here is the error message i have: I connect with a real account. 1/Do you think it's a F5 conf problem of a FTP/Certificate problem : Someone already had this kind of problem and how did he manage to resolve it? 2/Do I need to create a irules to limit the range of port to connect? Thanks in advance.
