ASM instance creation
HI Team , I have to create an WAF instance similar to the one which is already available . I need help on creating the ASM policy similar to the one which is already used by other VIP . So my ASM policy name is ASM_NETWORK_443 and I have to create an identical policy with name ASM_DRNETWORK_443 . Is there any option to clone the ASM policy or export and import the policy and rename the Policy name ? Kindly help me on this .28Views0likes2Commentsltm policy asm_auto_l7_policy
Hi Experts, We are migrating WAF in an HA pair from i4800 to i5800, UCS is loaded successfully on new pair. while comparing the configurations i found on some policy on previous node the status was legacy and on new node the status is published. what's the difference please? the status is highlighted in red in below config. old node config ltm policy asm_auto_l7_policy__epsite.telenorbank.pk { controls { asm } last-modified 2023-12-08:23:19:30 requires { http } rules { default { actions { 1 { asm enable policy /Common/PTCL-cloud_WAF } } ordinal 1 } } status legacy strategy first-match7 } New Node config ltm policy asm_auto_l7_policy__epsite.telenorbank.pk { controls { asm } last-modified 2024-04-17:13:00:12 requires { http } rules { default { actions { 1 { asm enable policy /Common/PTCL-cloud_WAF } } ordinal 1 } } status published strategy first-match }7Views0likes0CommentsDeploying F5 WAF in front of Azure Web App Services
Does anyone know of a supported architecture for deploying an Azure F5 WAF in front of Azure Web App Services to handle the SSL and ASM services against traffic destined for an Azure Web App Service (App Service not just an app server running in Azure).27Views0likes2CommentsiRule condition - request contains more than 10000 parameters
Hello, is it possible to create an iRule: "When request contains more than 10000 parameters then disable ASM policy at request time" (Requests with more than 10000 parameters are dropped / hard reset in default when ASM policy is used.)39Views0likes0CommentsWAF for APM Oauth Authorization VS
Hi, We are testing the using of F5 as a OAuth Authorization Server and also a Resource Server. We have a WAF policy attached the VS representing of the Resource Server, which has an IIS server behind it. Since VS of the Auth Server will only utilize APM capabilities and won't actually have any application/web server behind it, I'm wondering if it's advised to add a WAF policy for this VS. I was told it's not necessary but I find it odd, since attackers can still try to attack the F5 itself. Any thoughts?Solved129Views0likes6Commentsclient and server ssl profiles
I am new to f5 asm, in our environment we have set up a website behind WAF in transparent mode, We have installed a wildcard certificate on real web server and replicated it on waf using client and server ssl profiles. However, when we attach this created custom profiles to virtual server site doesn't work. Interestingly, when we replace it with client/server-insecure-compatible ssl profiles site works properly. Furthermore, site works normally when we bypass waf. What steps should we take to address this issue?87Views0likes4CommentsF5 API Security on AWS WAF
Hello community, We have deployed multiple APIs on EKS and have exposed them using an application load balancer. I have added AWS WAF on top of the ALB. I am using XML payload in the API and for XML security, I have enabled F5 API Security managed rule for WAF. My question is: Does F5 managed rule for API Security on AWS WAF provides XML validation? If yes, what rule is that inside the managed rule set? Can we configure the F5 managed rule to check my XML payload based on regex? How can I configure it? Thanks in advance! Avinash73Views0likes1Commentwhat is the use of "JavaScript Obfuscator" in ASM ?
Hi Experts , About - Bug ID 1060393: Extended high CPU usage caused by JavaScript Obfuscator. Can someone please explain the use of "JavaScript Obfuscator" process in ASM ? what is the use of it . Is there any workaround for the bug ID 1060393 ?48Views0likes2CommentsF5 Rules for AWS WAF - CVE-2021-22118 & CVE-2016-1000027
Hello, We're checking in the AWS marketplace for theF5 Rules for AWS WAF - Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) Rulesand want to check if the following CVEs are covered by this rule set? CVE-2021-22118: Local Privilege Escalation within Spring Webflux Multipart Request Handling CVE-2016-1000027:Pivotal Spring Framework through 5.3.16 suffers from a potential remote code execution (RCE) issue if used for Java deserialization of untrusted data. Thanks.Solved2.2KViews0likes18Comments