Important note about SSL VPN compatibility for 20.0 MR1 with EoL SFOS versions and UTM9 OS. Learn more in the release notes.

Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • +2 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 25 replies
  • Subscribers 44 subscribers
  • Views 8753 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

XG v18 SSL/TLS inspection interfering with Veeam Cloud Provider Replication

Bjoern Freiherr

Hey everyone,

we're using Veeam and replicate backups from remote sites to our main site. Since deploying v18, we started having issues with the replication failing. After working with Veeam Support, the solution was to completely disable SSL/TLS inspection on the firewall at the main site. Not sure why it's causing issues, but at this point, I can't turn inspection on because the backup replication will fail. How can this be resolved? We're not even decrypting, and I don't think there's a way to turn off inspection for specific connections.

The issue seems to exist only from one site that is also running XG v18. The other ones on v17.5.9 are fine, even with inspection turned on at the replication target site - very strange.

How to troubleshoot and fix this?

Anyone else having this issue?

Thanks!



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Hi,

    try turning the on the web proxy and then create exceptions for the site.

    What restrictions do you have in your firewall rule the VEEAM application or traffic?

    Ian

    XG115W - v20.0.2 MR-2 - Home

    XG on VM 8 - v20.0.2 MR-2

    If a post solves your question please use the 'Verify Answer' button.

  • 0 in reply to rfcat_vk

    Hmm, yeah I guess, but I think my ultimate goal would be to use the new DPI engine (and not have it break things ;) ). The firewall rule just looks at the port number, not the application.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    Hi Bjoern,

    because the backup is a streaming connection, DPI will not be able to touch it and you will need an exception in the DPI setup.

    Ian

    XG115W - v20.0.2 MR-2 - Home

    XG on VM 8 - v20.0.2 MR-2

    If a post solves your question please use the 'Verify Answer' button.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    Bjoern,

    Please share the firewall rule used. While the issue is occurring, please take a packet capture on XG.

    Decrypting backups don’t not make sense and I understand how even slower the backup can go if decryption occurs (when it works!).

    Regards

  • 0 in reply to lferrara

    The rule is very basic, just source IPs, services (using the TCP port), nothing else.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    This is strange as DPI does not scan traffic from WAN to LAN. Check IPS if it is blocking something.

  • 0 in reply to lferrara

    Oh, really? Wasn't aware of that. But somehow it's doing something.

    I checked all the logs and there was absolutely nothing being denied etc. from the source where I'm having the issue :( That's why it lead me to try turning off the SSL/TLS inspection as it was the last resort of what it could be. I noticed I was rejecting SSL compression and SSL 2.0 and 3.0. I doubt that Veeam would use those, but I set them to allow and not decrypt and turned inspection back on. We'll see if that makes a difference. I don't expect it to.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    So you access via DNAT your Veeam Infrastructur? 

    Or does your Veeam build up the Connection?

    In Log Viewer - TLS, you do not see matching connections of this Client?

    Could you show your TLS Rules? 

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    Yes the remote site establishes the connection to the replication target at the main site. I don't see anything logged under TLS for the remote site IP address, which makes sense if inspection only happens on outbound connections.

    I don't have any TLS rules as I'm not doing any decryption currently.

    Still leaves the question why turning off TLS inspection fixes the connectivity issue if it's not even scanning inbound connections.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    There is an Issue still open in XG, which maybe could be also causing this issue.

     Could this be the same as the Camera Issue?

     

    Do you see any packets with source IP of the Veeam Solution? 

     

    Also + Advice to open a Case to get this logged. 

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Reply
  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    There is an Issue still open in XG, which maybe could be also causing this issue.

     Could this be the same as the Camera Issue?

     

    Do you see any packets with source IP of the Veeam Solution? 

     

    Also + Advice to open a Case to get this logged. 

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Children
  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    Related to this topic, I wanted to mention the great post that Michael published:

     I'd suggest to take a look here as well before raising a case.

    If you do end up raising one, please share the number with me.

    Thanks,

    Florentino
    Director, Global Community & Digital Support
    Are you a Sophos Partner? | Product Documentation | @SophosSupport | Sign up for SMS Alerts
    If a post solves your question, please use the 'Verify Answer' button.
    The Award-winning Home of Sophos Support Videos! - Visit Sophos Techvids
  • 0 in reply to LuCar Toni

    In the firewall logs I do, but not in the SSL/TLS logs.

    I'll call a ticket in next week when I have some time. I can also pretty easily test this so traffic can be captured.

     

    Thanks for your help so far!

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    Perfect! Please let us know.

    As I said, DPI should not be responsible for this traffic unless it is a bug.

    Regards

  • 0 in reply to lferrara

    Hey guys, I opened a case: #9744383

    We've just been testing this with multiple different combinations of settings and nothing but disable SSL/TLS has worked so far. Even when the DNAT firewall rule is set to use the Proxy rather than DPI engine it still doesn't work.

    We upgraded to the latest release of v18 also.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    Hi,

    please upgrade to the v18 SR2 which will enable you to disable SSL/TLS on your specific rules and hopefully overcome your issue.

    Ian

    XG115W - v20.0.2 MR-2 - Home

    XG on VM 8 - v20.0.2 MR-2

    If a post solves your question please use the 'Verify Answer' button.

  • 0 in reply to rfcat_vk

    We upgraded to build 339 if that's what you mean, but I don't see an option to disable SSL/TLS inspection for a firewall rule. There's an on/off toggle for the inspection which is global which solves our problem, but that's not the point because I'm disabling the entire feature that's being promoted in V18. Making a SSL/TLS rule with don't decrypt is not applicable here because the WAN zone can't be selected as the source and we're not even decrypting anything either.

    To me it looks like a severe bug that's interfering with traffic that shouldn't be inspected. It's being escalated to GES now after troubleshooting and testing for 4h straight.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    Hi,

    my apologies, you are correct. I need to go back and review the thread on the subject to find out why I misunderstood the intent of that switch.

    Ian

    XG115W - v20.0.2 MR-2 - Home

    XG on VM 8 - v20.0.2 MR-2

    If a post solves your question please use the 'Verify Answer' button.

  • 0 in reply to rfcat_vk

    No worries. I'll post an update once I hear more from the escalations team.

  • 0 in reply to Bjoern Freiherr

    I have followed up with the response from Michael Dunn in the thread where the feature is questioned as well.

    A bit disappointing because that was an issue I raised doing EAP about not being able to create simple firewall rule as was the case in v17.5.8

    Ian

    XG115W - v20.0.2 MR-2 - Home

    XG on VM 8 - v20.0.2 MR-2

    If a post solves your question please use the 'Verify Answer' button.

  • 0 in reply to rfcat_vk

    The DPI engine is always looking and inspecting at traffic, even if you don't want it to. It is a very poor implementation IMHO.

    So, you can disable the DPI completely and continue to use the Proxy or wait until Sophos get's a clue and realizes they need to make a change.

    Many issues have come up because of their decisions. Hopefully they change their awful approach to DPI.

    What most don't realize is that XG cannot meet stated performance metrics because of how Sophos chose to implement DPI. I questioned the performance of XG because of the change but, did not get a response. The XG cannot meet the performance metrics they quote in the current V18 config. As an example, Sophos states 16,000 mbps for the XG210. It cannot come close to that on v18 because the DPI engine is looking at all traffic.

    If this is production, I would downgrade back to v17.5 if I were you.

Unfiltered HTML