Category: F5 iRule

F5 Cookie Encryption

Create a new persistence profile with cookie name “MYCOOKIE”

ltm persistence cookie PROF_MYCOOKIE {
cookie-name MYCOOKIE
defaults-from cookie
}

Use the following iRule with the Virtual Server:



when CLIENT_ACCEPTED {

set COOKIE_NAME "MYCOOKIE"

set PASSPHRASE "Secret1234"

}


when HTTP_RESPONSE {

if { [HTTP::cookie exists $COOKIE_NAME] } {

HTTP::cookie encrypt $COOKIE_NAME $PASSPHRASE

}

}


when HTTP_REQUEST {

if { [HTTP::cookie exists $COOKIE_NAME] } {

set DECRYPTED [HTTP::cookie decrypt $COOKIE_NAME $PASSPHRASE]

if { ($DECRYPTED eq "") } {

# Cookie wasn't encrypted, delete it

HTTP::cookie remove $COOKIE_NAME

}

}

}




It is essential to understand that the cookie encryption is useful in masking the information about the F5 Load Balancer and the real-servers serving the content. If someone can capture the encrypted cookie, they can still use it for malicious purposes even without decrypting it. 


You can utilize a different cookie name and pass phrase in the above iRule. Just remember to use the same cookie name in the iRule and in the cookie persistence profile


There are ways to implement cookie persistence using the HTTP profile in the F5 LTM. However, there can be issues with utilizing this as there is a bug that prevents proper functioning when the cookie name as a "." (period) in it.


Reference:


SOL4784


SOL12472

F5 iRule – Secure & HTTPOnly Cookie

The following iRule taken from devcentral.f5.com was utilized to insert the “Secure” tag to all the cookies within the Response Header. Note that some part of the iRule has been “deactivated” as this part involves adding the “HTTPOnly” cookie tag which isn’t required for this customer. I was able to verify its functionality in 10.x code version (also works in 11.x):

when HTTP_RESPONSE {
if { [catch { set CK_VALUE [HTTP::header values "Set-Cookie"]
HTTP::header remove "Set-Cookie"

foreach value $CK_VALUE {
if { "" != $value } {
set TEST_VALUE [string tolower $value]
set LENGTH_VALUE [string length $value]

switch -glob $TEST_VALUE {
"*;secure*" -
"*; secure*" { }
default { set value "$value; Secure"; }
}

switch -glob $TEST_VALUE {
 "*;httponly*" -
 "*; httponly*" { }
 default { set value "$value; HttpOnly"; }
 }

HTTP::header insert "Set-Cookie" $value

}
}
} ] } {
log local0. "Exception thrown, client_addr=[client_addr] HttpOnly and/or Secure cookie attributes may not have been set"
}
}

For 11.x code version, there is a simpler way of achieving this functionality as noted here: https://devcentral.f5.com/wiki/iRules.HTTP__cookie.ashx

HTTP::cookie httponly <name> [enable|disable]
HTTP::cookie secure <name> [enable|disable]

When the “HTTP::cookie” rules were tried out in a lab environment using the following iRule:

when HTTP_RESPONSE {
   HTTP::cookie version BigIP_Cookie 1
   HTTP::cookie httponly BigIP_Cookie enable 
}

I got the following error log:
TCL error: /Common/iRule-HTTPOnly-Secure <HTTP_RESPONSE> – Illegal argument (line 1) invoked from within “HTTP::cookie version BigIP_Cookie 1”

So, I removed the “cookie version” command:

when HTTP_RESPONSE {
   HTTP::cookie httponly BigIP_Cookie enable 
}

and got the following error:
TCL error: /Common/iRule-HTTPOnly-Secure – Improper version (line 1) invoked from within “HTTP::cookie httponly BigIP_Cookie enable”

It looks like the “HTTP::coookie version” function isn’t working as expected in 11.x code version. F5 Bug-id for this issue 338981.

This is an alternate iRule that seems to be working in 11.x code version

when HTTP_RESPONSE {
set COOKIE_VAL [HTTP::header values "Set-Cookie"]
HTTP::header remove "Set-Cookie"

foreach COOKIE_NAME $COOKIE_VAL {
HTTP::header insert "Set-Cookie" "${COOKIE_NAME}; Secure; HttpOnly"
}
}

Reference: Devcentral.

iRule – To iRule or Not to

TCL based iRule is a force-multiplier when it comes to Application Delivery Networking utilizing F5 devices. However, it is essential to understand the interaction of iRule with the normal application.

As an F5 iRule administrator, it is essential to understand the responsibility of maintaining the code. Does this fall within the realm of Application Delivery Engineers or DevOps ? This would depend on the organization and the roles for different people and frankly, there is no clear cut answer to this question.

Having said that, I believe iRule can be used effectively to perform the following functions based on the information available within the header or content of the packet, without affecting DevOps:

  • Load Balance to Pools of Servers
  • Persistence actions
  • Serving Sorry Page or Sorry URL

Load Balancing & Persistence actions will not alter the content of the packet and hence, it should be easily achieved without disrupting the Developers. The 2 functionalities provided do not affect the code but the header or content of the packet is utilized to pick the right server or pool of servers.

  • Redirects to specific URL
  • Changing contents of header or packet

For redirects and for altering contents of header or packet, it is essential that the Dev team is aware of the traffic flow. This will prevent any conflicting functionality that may disrupt the normal application delivery.

iRULE – True-Client-IP Block

Sometimes a customer may serve the content from a Virtual Server via Akamai and may want to block a specific client IP that is presented in the “True-Client-IP” that is inserted by Akamai. The following iRULE would provide the required functionality:



when HTTP_REQUEST {
set HOST [string tolower [HTTP::host]]
if { ([HTTP::header exists "True-Client-IP"]) and ([HTTP::header "True-Client-IP"] != "") } {
set True_Client_IP [HTTP::header "True-Client-IP"]
} else {
set True_Client_IP 0.0.0.0
}
if { [class match $True_Client_IP equals CLASS_BLOCK_IP] } {
discard
}
}

Discard would silently drop the connection. Reject can be utilized instead of Discard. Reject would send a TCP reset to the client. Instead of Reject or Discard, we can also serve a sorry page or a redirect, if required.

iRule – Altering Header Information

This iRULE example will alter the incoming URI before passing the request to the servers:



when HTTP_REQUEST {
switch -glob [HTTP::uri] {
/old_URI/* { HTTP::uri /new_URI[HTTP::uri] }
}
}

In this case, for any incoming request that starts with the URI “/old_URI/” (http://domain.com/old_URI/), the “/old_URI/” will be replaced with “/new_URI/old_URI” and this will be passed to the servers (http://domain.com/new_URI/old_URI/)

The various interpretations within the switch statement:

/old_URI/      – URI equals /old_URI/
/old_URI/*    – URI starts with /old_URI/
*/old_URI/* – URI contains /old_URI/

Instead of the “switch” statement, we can also use an “if-statement” like this:



when HTTP_REQUEST {
if { [HTTP::uri] starts_with "/old_URI/" } {
HTTP::uri /new_URI[HTTP::uri]
}
}

A slightly more complex version of the URI function alteration is provided here:



when HTTP_REQUEST {
set HOST [string tolower [HTTP::host]]
set URI [string tolower [HTTP::uri]]

if { $URI contains "/NEW_Session_ID=" } {HTTP::uri [string map {/NEW_Session_ID= /OLD_Session_ID=} [HTTP::uri]]
pool POOL-WEB-Server
}
}

when HTTP_RESPONSE {
if { [HTTP::header values Location] contains "/OLD_Session_ID=" } {
HTTP::header replace Location [string map {/OLD_Session_ID= /NEW_Session_ID=} [HTTP::header value Location]]
}
}

For any incoming HTTP Request, “/NEW_Session_ID=” within the URI is replaced with “/OLD_Session_ID=” and passed to the servers in the pool “POOL-WEB-Server”.

For any HTTP Response from the server to the client that contains the HTTP Header Location, “/OLD_Session_ID=” is replaced with “/NEW_Session_ID=”

This can be used to “mask” the URI or any other header information between the client and the server.

The following iRule will remove “/m/” in the incoming URI and send a redirect:


when HTTP_REQUEST {
set URI [string tolower [HTTP::uri]]
if {$URI starts_with "/m/" }{ 
set NEW_URI [string map {"/m/" "/"} [HTTP::uri]] 
HTTP::respond 301 Location "http://www.domain.com$NEW_URI"
}
}

TEST:

$ curl -I http://10.10.10.10/m/OLD_URI
HTTP/1.0 301 Moved Permanently
Location: http://www.domain.com/OLD_URI
Server: BigIP
Connection: Keep-Alive
Content-Length: 0

The “/m/” in the URI is replaced with “/” as seen in the “Location” header.

This has been tested in production environment on 10.x code of F5 LTM

iRULE – non-English Characters

The web browser will URL encode URI’s that contain special characters.

For example, http://www.domain.com/été is encoded as follows: http://www.domain.com/%C3%A9t%C3%A9

when HTTP_REQUEST { 

set ENCODED_URI [ b64encode [HTTP::uri]]

    switch [HTTP::host] { "domain.com" { 

          if { (($ENCODED_URI eq "LyVDMyVBOXQlQzMlQTk=") or ($ENCODED_URI eq "L2ZyLyVDMyVBOXQlQzMlQTk=")) } 

{ pool POOL_Web-Servers } 

} 

}

}

“/été” URL encodes to “/%C3%A9t%C3%A9″ which base64 encodes to “LyVDMyVBOXQlQzMlQTk=”

“/fr/été” URL encodes to “/fr/%C3%A9t%C3%A9” which base64 encodes to “L2ZyLyVDMyVBOXQlQzMlQTk=”

An Intro to iRULE

This post will provide basic information related to iRULE. The intention of writing this post is to provide someone new to iRULE with basic introduction and cover some of the often used Functionality. This isn’t an in-depth coverage of iRule.

What is an iRULE:

TCL based scripting that is utilized by F5 Application Delivery Modules to manipulate traffic.

Structure of an iRULE:

when <EVENT> {
<PERFORM ACTION>
}

Commonly used iRULE Events:

  • HTTP_REQUEST
  • HTTP_RESPONSE
  • CLIENT_ACCEPTED

Having worked with iRules for almost 5 years, the above 3 events are what I utilize on a daily basis. Almost 9 out of 10 iRules that I have written cover the above events. For an iRule rookie, I would recommend understanding the above 3 events.

Within the structure of the iRule, <PERFORM_ACTION> provides the ACTION to be performed if certain CONDITIONS are matched. For example:

if { [HTTP::host] equals “domain.com” } {
pool POOL_WEB-SERVER
}

Even if you don’t understand scripting, the above information should be quite clear that you are sending the traffic to the pool: POOL_WEB-SERVER, if the incoming host header equals “domain.com” 🙂

Common ACTIONS that I have utilized:

  • Load Balancing based on incoming header values
  • Redirection based on incoming header values
  • Persistence based on incoming header values

As seen above, the vast majority of ACTIONS involve one of three actions based on the incoming header value. We can also perform more complicated actions based on the content of the incoming packet. However, in my opinion, it is better to avoid performing such actions on the load balancer. As the code gets complex, there is a serious question on accountability and ownership – who owns the code (Dev guys, Network guys ?!?) – this requires a separate post just to hash out the realms of control.

Points to Remember:

  • iRULE is TCL based scripting utilized to manipulate traffic on an F5 device
  • iRULE, like TCL is EVENT based
  • iRULE’s structure consists of EVENT, CONDITIONAL statements & ACTION to perform