Skip to content

docs: document SECURITY_WAF_VIOLATION_TRANSPARENT for $app_protect_outcome_reason#2095

Open
zahava-brown wants to merge 1 commit into
nginx:mainfrom
zahava-brown:docs/wafmc-14828-transparent-outcome
Open

docs: document SECURITY_WAF_VIOLATION_TRANSPARENT for $app_protect_outcome_reason#2095
zahava-brown wants to merge 1 commit into
nginx:mainfrom
zahava-brown:docs/wafmc-14828-transparent-outcome

Conversation

@zahava-brown

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Proposed changes

The F5 WAF for NGINX access-log variable $app_protect_outcome_reason can emit
SECURITY_WAF_VIOLATION_TRANSPARENT for a request that is allowed while the policy
is in transparent (would-block) mode but that would be blocked if the policy were
in blocking mode.

This value is already documented for the security log in
content/waf/logging/security-logs.md, but it was missing from the
$app_protect_outcome_reason variable reference in
content/waf/logging/access-logs.md. This change adds it, bringing the access-log
documentation to parity with the security-log documentation.

Type of change

  • Documentation update

Ref: WAFMC-14828

…tcome_reason

WAFMC-14828: the nginx access-log variable $app_protect_outcome_reason can emit
SECURITY_WAF_VIOLATION_TRANSPARENT for requests allowed in transparent
(would-block) mode. This brings the access-log documentation to parity with the
security-log documentation (content/waf/logging/security-logs.md), which already
lists this value.
@zahava-brown zahava-brown requested a review from a team as a code owner July 2, 2026 11:11
@github-actions github-actions Bot added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation product/waf Issues related to F5 WAF for NGINX labels Jul 2, 2026
Comment thread content/waf/logging/access-logs.md
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation product/waf Issues related to F5 WAF for NGINX

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants