Forum Discussion

Nikoolayy1's avatar
Jun 21, 2021
Solved

F5 WAF/ASM block users that trigger too many violations by source ip/device id using the correlation logs

Hello to All,

 

 

I was thinking of using the iRule tables command to write when a user ip/device id makes too many violations for a time perioud and to get blocked for some time but I see that the F5 ASM has correlation logs that trigger incidents but there is not a lot info if this can be used in iRules or to block user ip addresses / deviceid.

 

 

https://support.f5.com/csp/article/K92532922

  • To answer your question regarding the required license - yes, IP I is a subscription feature of AdvWAF. You need to spend money on that one.

     

    For the table command, I don't have a lot experience. Hence I would also not make any suggestion how an iRule could look like.

     

    Interesting question would be: If you block a client based on its source IP for 5 minutes, what will happen if that client makes a new violation after 4:50 minutes? Will the block be released after 5 minutes or after 4:50 + 5 more minutes?

    This kind of "business logic" must be solved in all soltions - IP Intelligence feed, BIG-IQ and Ansible.

6 Replies

  • What are you trying to achieve? A way to block a source IP that has caused n ASM violations in x seconds for a specific amount of time on Layer 3?

    • Nikoolayy1's avatar
      Nikoolayy1
      Icon for MVP rankMVP

      Yes but also first using the "ASM::fingerprint" if present as this is more granular and only if there is no Device ID then the source IP address. With the table command I should be able to do something like that but I was wondering if the F5 ASM correlation data and its Incidents can't be used in some way with or without irule for such tasks?

      • Daniel_Wolf's avatar
        Daniel_Wolf
        Icon for MVP rankMVP

        I had a different train of thought. Use the Source IP from the logs (Splunk, ELK, similar) and create a dynamic IP Intelligence feed list from this data.

         

        Not sure about the Device ID... That fact that there is Device ID+ and Shape Recognize makes me wonder if you should build a solution based on Device ID. It might be a feature that could be deprecated at a certain point in the future.