<?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: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219236#M41896</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;You can do it a little differently to achieve the same thing by creating a 'Group With Exclusions'. Attached are how I did it. You can add any public IP ranges that are also part of your internal/DMZ network to the 'except' group as well. This way the group itself is 'anything except the defined IP ranges' rather than negating the whole destination cell in the rule.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 06:32:29 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>emmap</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-07-01T06:32:29Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219195#M41891</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, I am tightening up our rulebase for some new internal network that I have created&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have hit the issue that I several rules that allow certain hosts internet access via having ANY in the destination.&amp;nbsp; This now affects my new subnets as a possible way to access them as matching the ANY destination.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone have a clever suggestion of a way around this without rulebase changes such as a block rule before all affected rules hits that first then gets denied ( this has ramifications for rule ordering for the allowed accesses )?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The internet access need to be unrestricted hence any so restricting that is not an option&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;May Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Neil&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Clustered Checkpoint R81.10 Take 150 (x2 devices)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jun 2024 07:56:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219195#M41891</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nelly</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-29T07:56:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219197#M41893</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;There was a discussion about defining Internet a few years back.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Management/Properly-defining-the-Internet-within-a-security-policy/m-p/10561" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Management/Properly-defining-the-Internet-within-a-security-policy/m-p/10561&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So you have many ways to approach this. Personally, I tend to use private or internal networks in a group and negate them as destination, but you could use the Internet object or any other discussed method depending on your topology.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:51:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219197#M41893</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alex-</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-29T08:51:01Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219198#M41894</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I do the same with the negate method&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:59:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219198#M41894</guid>
      <dc:creator>Lesley</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-29T08:59:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219204#M41895</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Super easy, this is what you do. Edit policy layer, then network layer, enable urlf blade, save, publish, add Internet object as dst, publish, install policy.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thats it &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Forgot to add, make sure urlf + appc blades are enabled on gateway object.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:42:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219204#M41895</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-06-29T20:42:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219236#M41896</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You can do it a little differently to achieve the same thing by creating a 'Group With Exclusions'. Attached are how I did it. You can add any public IP ranges that are also part of your internal/DMZ network to the 'except' group as well. This way the group itself is 'anything except the defined IP ranges' rather than negating the whole destination cell in the rule.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 06:32:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219236#M41896</guid>
      <dc:creator>emmap</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-01T06:32:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219308#M41914</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Why not use ExternalZone?&lt;BR /&gt;This should be associated with your external interface(s).&lt;BR /&gt;Available for R8x gateways.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 18:53:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219308#M41914</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-01T18:53:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219366#M41927</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;VPN-s go via internet, if i use external zone will this be affected ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 09:13:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219366#M41927</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nelly</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-02T09:13:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219371#M41929</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If its tied to your external interface, then it wont work in such scenario.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Andy&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 10:16:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219371#M41929</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-02T10:16:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create firewall rule for internet access without using any as destination</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219417#M41942</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;For IPv4, Internets_Except should probably also contain&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;0.0.0.0/8 - reserved for the local network&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;100.64.0.0/10 - private network for CG NAT (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6598" target="_self"&gt;RFC 6598&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;127.0.0.0/8 - loopback&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;169.254.0.0/16 - link local&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;192.0.0.0/24 - private network (Dual Stack Lite; &lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6333" target="_self"&gt;RFC 6333&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;192.0.2.0/24 - reserved for documentation (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5737" target="_self"&gt;RFC 5737&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;192.88.99.0/24 - reserved (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7526" target="_self"&gt;RFC 7526&lt;/A&gt;; originally for 6to4 relay; while that has been deprecated, the block has not been released)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;198.18.0.0/15 - private network for benchmarking performance (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2544" target="_self"&gt;RFC 2544&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;198.51.100.0/24 - reserved for documentation (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5737" target="_self"&gt;RFC 5737&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;203.0.113.0/24 - reserved for documentation (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5737" target="_self"&gt;RFC 5737&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;224.0.0.0/4 - multicast (there's also a multicast network reserved for documentation:&amp;nbsp;233.252.0.0/24, &lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6676" target="_self"&gt;RFC 6676&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;240.0.0.0/4 - reserved experimental (&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3232" target="_self"&gt;RFC 3232&lt;/A&gt;)&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;None of these destinations are allowed to refer to real things on the public Internet.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 13:39:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Create-firewall-rule-for-internet-access-without-using-any-as/m-p/219417#M41942</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bob_Zimmerman</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-07-02T13:39:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

