<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Antispoofing and VPN on domain VPN in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212563#M40366</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;No, just plain physical topology will be enough&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:09:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-04-29T14:09:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212561#M40365</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We have a Checkpoint gateway who has plenty of vpn site to site with other Checkpoint managed by our organisation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We use domain base VPN on both star/mesh mode.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I need to proper configure antispoofing on prevent mode.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Should I add on both ends "Dont't check packets from" including encryption domains, to prevent packets to be dropped by antispoofing?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On FWA to configure "Dont't check packets from" of encryption domain B, and viceversa?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:15:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212561#M40365</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ilovecheckpoint</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-29T14:15:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on domain VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212563#M40366</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;No, just plain physical topology will be enough&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:09:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212563#M40366</guid>
      <dc:creator>_Val_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-29T14:09:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on domain VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212572#M40367</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Val,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your answer.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On Gateway A, a VSX, the one who has plenty of vpn, the interface is set as external one.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;"Dont't check packets from" is unselected, on detect mode, all logs are seen as address spoofing.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;On Gateway B (the other vpn end), "Dont't check packets from" is selected, for only mobile network configured on itself. No spoofing is detected/prevented.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:23:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212572#M40367</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ilovecheckpoint</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-29T14:23:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212617#M40381</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;All you do is this...simply add PEER's external IP into that group. You dont even need anything from the enc. domain, all it cares about is external peer's address.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:09:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212617#M40381</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-29T17:09:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on domain VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212622#M40382</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;In antispoofing, External takes the topology of every Internal interface, combines them all, then logically inverts them into a "NOT Internal" topology definition. If antispoofing is flagging traffic on an external interface, that means one or more of your internal interfaces are configured incorrectly. My bet is there's a manual group on one or more internal interfaces which contains 10.0.0.0/8 or something similarly broad.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/212622#M40382</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bob_Zimmerman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-04-29T17:54:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213075#M40512</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Networks that belongs to VPN peers in route-based mode are usually added in group for &lt;EM&gt;don't check packet for&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 13:08:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213075#M40512</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckPointerXL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-03T13:08:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213095#M40513</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Interesting...personally, I never had to do that and works fine.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 13:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213095#M40513</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-03T13:23:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213127#M40528</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You should be able to set your interior-facing interfaces to "Defined by routes" for all gateways. &amp;nbsp;On the vpnt interfaces, set those with anti-spoofing disabled. &amp;nbsp;You exterior-facing interfaces (to internet) should remain as External. &amp;nbsp;Interfaces facing local-attached LANs (networks with no downstream next-hop) should remain as "This network" (not a static group).&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I've moved just about all my customers to this dynamically-calculated topology and life has been pretty good. &amp;nbsp;We can do dynamic and static routing on both interior and VTI networks as needed. &amp;nbsp; Yep, it works on VSX, too.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;"Defined by routes" will consult the RouteD FIB every few seconds for topology calculation and keep your network flexible at all points. &amp;nbsp;With R80.30+, you should almost(*) never have to use a hard-set group object to define topology anymore.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;(*) Yes, "almost never"; no doubt someone has some special scenario, but this should be the exception rather than the rule now.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 15:11:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213127#M40528</guid>
      <dc:creator>Duane_Toler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-03T15:11:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Antispoofing and VPN on Domain-based VPN</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213128#M40529</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;i agree with your scenario&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;especially with vsx, absolutely suggest to use &lt;EM&gt;network defined by routes&lt;/EM&gt;&amp;nbsp;; stay far away from "automatically calculated", which it creates a lot of duplicate objects that, in some scenario, it raises a lot of hard issues&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIV id="gtx-trans" style="position: absolute; left: 515px; top: 65px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="gtx-trans-icon"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 15:15:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Antispoofing-and-VPN-on-Domain-based-VPN/m-p/213128#M40529</guid>
      <dc:creator>CheckPointerXL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-05-03T15:15:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

