<?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: Strangeness with UDP packets filtering by src port in Firewall and Security Management</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243012#M47213</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We track connections via five-tuple (IP protocol. Source IP, Source Port, Destination IP, destination port).&lt;BR /&gt;You are repeating the usage of source ports for both the source and destination in a short period of time, which means it looks like the same connection attempt.&lt;BR /&gt;These logs are suppressed per the "Excessive Log Grace Period" set in Global Properties.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29793i6DC50EB07338FC11/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This is expected behavior&lt;BR /&gt;In any case, you should be able to confirm with a tcpdump or similar the traffic is not getting through the firewall.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 23:50:13 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-03-04T23:50:13Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Strangeness with UDP packets filtering by src port</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/242900#M47205</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Good day!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I have virtual CheckPoint - Open Server, SMS + SG R81.20 take 634 with Jumbo take 98 installed, with interfaces/topology:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 718px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29777i0DDF07020C9FB40F/image-dimensions/718x227?v=v2" width="718" height="227" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Then I have 2 access rules (ignore first 2):&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;1. Drop, UDP service: dst port - 1-65535, src port - 5566&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;2. Accept, any&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29778i4B20C334039D2B80/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 390px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29780i95DA5D997E2F7F36/image-dimensions/390x402?v=v2" width="390" height="402" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Example case:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Traffic is sent by host &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A class="" title="https://1.0.0.2/" href="https://1.0.0.2/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;1.0.0.2&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;, consists of 10 UDP packets, src IP - 1.0.0.1X, dst IP - &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A class="" title="https://2.0.0.2/" href="https://2.0.0.2/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;2.0.0.2&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;, src MACs are randomized, dst MAC is MAC of eth0; ports used for packets:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;src port dst port&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;3745&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8823&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;5566&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8823&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;2346&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8899&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;1026&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 7478&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;5566&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8899&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;9328&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8899&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;5566&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 5478&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;5566&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8899&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;1239&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 2348&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;8345&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 8899&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;We expect that 4 packets should be dropped (with src port = 5566) and 6 packets should be accepted&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;In reality, sometimes first access rule (according to logs) drops other packets too. Amount of falsely dropped packets varies - from 0 (i.e., works as expected) to 4 (worst case yet)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 880px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29781i32F2F79A54FE716B/image-dimensions/880x472?v=v2" width="880" height="472" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Notes:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;* Looks like it doesn't depend on Topology choosen for eth0 and eth1 (tried other variants)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;* It works just fine if there are no repeating dst ports (like 8899 and 8823 in the example above)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;* Doesn't look like sending those packets with time gap changes anything (tried from 1 ms to 1 s)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Question is - is this expected?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;And if so, where can i learn why this happens?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thank you.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 11:19:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/242900#M47205</guid>
      <dc:creator>fewizz_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-03-04T11:19:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strangeness with UDP packets filtering by src port</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243012#M47213</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We track connections via five-tuple (IP protocol. Source IP, Source Port, Destination IP, destination port).&lt;BR /&gt;You are repeating the usage of source ports for both the source and destination in a short period of time, which means it looks like the same connection attempt.&lt;BR /&gt;These logs are suppressed per the "Excessive Log Grace Period" set in Global Properties.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29793i6DC50EB07338FC11/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This is expected behavior&lt;BR /&gt;In any case, you should be able to confirm with a tcpdump or similar the traffic is not getting through the firewall.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 23:50:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243012#M47213</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-03-04T23:50:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strangeness with UDP packets filtering by src port</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243044#M47214</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thank you for the response!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I should have clarified (sorry for that) that `X` in src IP 1.0.0.1X varies from 0 to 9 for all 10 packets,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;i. e. there should be collisions no between five-tuples:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 982px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29800i61B7B978F1F5D4ED/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;, so I don't think that `Excessive log grace period` option is related&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;And traffic is actually getting through (listening on 2.0.0.2):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29801i3FBFEB89F49DD008/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Dropped packets:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29802iA3DA3C60D9FEEE63/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example of falsely dropped packet:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="image.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/29803i757E75C88BD8C845/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="image.png" alt="image.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 07:12:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243044#M47214</guid>
      <dc:creator>fewizz_</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-03-05T07:12:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strangeness with UDP packets filtering by src port</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243082#M47218</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I assume the reason this is happening is a bug of some sort.&lt;BR /&gt;Your best bet is to open a TAC case.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 14:59:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Strangeness-with-UDP-packets-filtering-by-src-port/m-p/243082#M47218</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-03-05T14:59:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

