Enterprise Security best practices with F5 WAF
When it comes to responsibilities of each layer in an enterprise (i.e. DMZ/ WAF, application, SoR etc), and provided F5 Advanced WAF is deployed on the DMZ, should other layers assume primary responsibility of mitigations supported out-of-the-box by F5 WAF. i.e. Provided that F5 WAF supports bot defense, should the the layer below (application layer) as well be hardened to defend against bots by implementing features like fingerprinting, validating remote IPs based on HTTP headers etc? Certain defense mechanisms - specifically in the case of bot defense, go beyond the expertise of typical application development and having application developers to harden their apps against bots will just add overhead IMO, however one can still argue it's agains defense in depth. What's the best practice and guideline F5 provides?
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 .
ltm 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 }
Deploying 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).
client 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?F5 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! Avinash
