Im facing the issue with site to site VPN from sophos to PAlo alto. Error- calculated HASH does not match HASH payload

Hala Ranjith and welcome to the UTM Community!

I don't recognize that log format - is that from the Palo Alto device?

I'm not familiar with the PA device, so you might also need to go to the equivalent community on their site.

IPsec in the UTM does not accept Aggressive Mode, only Main Mode.  Once you've resolved that, if the connection still doesn't succeed, show us the IPsec log from the UTM:

1. Confirm that Debug is not enabled.
2. Disable the IPsec Connection.
3. Start the IPsec Live Log and wait for it to begin to populate.
4. Enable the IPsec Connection.
5. Copy here about 60 lines from enabling through the error.

Cheers - Bob

Dear Dirkkotte/ Bob,

thanks for your inputs.

however now tunnel is coming up but after some times (may 1 hour , 2 , 3 hr) tunnel going down automatically. see the logs below:

2019-10-24 23:07:40 21[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|20> nothing to initiate
2019-10-24 23:07:40 04[NET] sending packet: from LOCAL IP[500] to REMOTE IP[500]
2019-10-24 23:07:40 03[NET] received packet: from REMOTE IP[500] to LOCAL IP[500] on Port2_ppp
2019-10-24 23:07:40 03[NET] waiting for data on sockets
2019-10-24 23:07:40 11[NET] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|20> received packet: from REMOTE IP[500] to LOCAL IP[500] (92 bytes)
2019-10-24 23:07:40 11[ENC] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|20> parsed INFORMATIONAL_V1 request 3546400854 [ HASH N(DPD_ACK) ]
2019-10-24 23:07:40 11[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|20> activating new tasks
2019-10-24 23:07:40 11[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|20> nothing to initiate
2019-10-24 23:07:53 03[NET] received packet: from REMOTE IP[500] to LOCAL IP[500] on Port2_ppp
2019-10-24 23:07:53 03[NET] waiting for data on sockets
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[NET] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> received packet: from REMOTE IP[500] to LOCAL IP[500] (92 bytes)
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[ENC] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> parsed INFORMATIONAL_V1 request 1335338711 [ HASH D ]
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> received DELETE for IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[19]
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> deleting IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[19] between LOCAL IP[db05p.tabreed.ae]...REMOTE IP[REMOTE IP]
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[19] state change: ESTABLISHED => DELETING
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> Found existing IKE_SA in state ESTABLISHED, skipping reestablishment.
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[MGR] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> tried to checkin and delete nonexisting IKE_SA
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|21> IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[21] state change: CREATED => DESTROYING
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[19] state change: DELETING => DELETING
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [SSO] (get_cfg) [CFG] sso: 0
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [SSO] (sso_invoke_once) SSO is disabled.
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (cop_updown_invoke_once) no user identification is provided!
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (ref_counting) ref_count: 1 to 0 -- down -- (192.168.0.1/32#10.83.180.54/32)
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (ref_counting_remote) ref_count_remote: 2 to 1 -- down -- (LOCAL IP#REMOTE IP)
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (get_cfg) [CFG] IPtables: 1
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (get_cfg) [CFG] route: 1
2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[APP] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> [COP-UPDOWN] (get_cfg) [CFG] vti: 0

 I see that remote end sending delete message:

2019-10-24 23:07:53 17[IKE] <DB_05P_TO_DU-1|19> received DELETE for IKE_SA DB_05P_TO_DU-1[19]

Any thoughts on the above why PA sending the delete message to disconnect the tunnel (we don't have any access to remote Peer PA, not easy to get the logs as well )

Appreciated your inputs.

Thanks in advance,

Ranji

A new/next problem?

Do you enable/disable DPD at booth sides?

Matches the IPSec Phase1 / Phase 2 timers at booth sides exactly?

I like Dirk's suggestion, Ranji - any luck?

Cheers - Bob

Dear Dirk/Bob,

Same vpn. Tunnel establishing now but disconnects frequently.

Yes already configured DPD on both ends :

Intervel- 30sec

Retry-120 sec

Many Thanks,

Ranji

Ranji, please post the IPsec log from the UTM that corresponds to the times of the PA log in your post almost 14 hours ago.

Also, show us pictures of the Edits of the IPsec Policy in both the UTM and the Palo Alto.

Cheers - Bob

Dear Bob,

Please note that we could collect only strongswan.log from the sophos fw that i forwarded in my last response.

@PA Ph1:- (responder only)

Ikev1,Aes 256, sha1,group5,aggresive,keylife- 28800sec, nattraversal-no

@PA Ph2:

Sha1, aes256, no pfs,keylife-3600sec

Note: sophos has the corresponding settings (initiator)

Thanks,

Ranji

Dear Bob,

Please note that we could collect only strongswan.log from the sophos fw that i forwarded in my last response.

@PA Ph1:- (responder only)

Ikev1,Aes 256, sha1,group5,aggresive,keylife- 28800sec, nattraversal-no

@PA Ph2:

Sha1, aes256, no pfs,keylife-3600sec

Note: sophos has the corresponding settings (initiator)

Thanks,

Ranji

Ranji, I've been working with IPsec logs from the UTM for almost 15 years and I don't recognize the log you posted as having been generated by a UTM.  Do you have a different Sophos product like Cyberoam or XG Firewall or ???

I'm a visual-tactile learner and, when solving problems, I need to look at original data, not descriptions of it.  If this is a UTM problem, please post the pictures I requested.

Cheers - Bob

Dear Bob,

Kindly note the product model  sophos  XG108 firewall with latest firmware.

Thanks,

Ranji

Ah-hah!  This is the UTM Community, Ranji.  Please join the XG Firewall Community and then one of us moderators will be able to move your thread there where you will get more eyes on this issue from people better versed in XG.

Cheers - Bob