<?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 a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB in Spark Firewall (SMB)</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/67846#M2624</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Just ran into this myself. Browser Based User Awareness is indeed pretty lame. Its a shame that this is %100 doable if the smb is controlled by a mgmt server.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>John_Fleming</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-11-20T02:45:10Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7093#M124</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hey guys! A costumer wanted to configure a way to bypass captive portal authentication&amp;nbsp;for a specific network on a locally managed 1400 appliance. I found &lt;A href="https://supportcenter.checkpoint.com/supportcenter/portal?eventSubmit_doGoviewsolutiondetails=&amp;amp;solutionid=sk117593&amp;amp;partition=Advanced&amp;amp;product=Small"&gt;sk117593&lt;/A&gt;, which suggests using hotspot.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So I disabled User Awareness and enabled hotspot for the networks that require authentication. I then set configure radius to use the Active Directory users. But this way all User Awareness features are lost!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there any other way to create an exception?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This feature is crucial, and we can actually lose customers because of this. I hope that development is working on this.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2017 15:39:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7093#M124</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pedro_Espindola</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-04T15:39:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7094#M125</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The SK was pretty clear this was the "workaround" to do it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What specific "User Awareness" features did you lose here?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 21:32:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7094#M125</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-05T21:32:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7095#M126</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;When disabling User Awareness it is not possible to enforce access to internal servers or to specific applications by user groups.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, logs will show the user only when you open them, which compromises visibility. But that's a minor issue.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I found a better workaround. Here is what I did instead:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Enabled User Awareness and disabled hotspot.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Enabled the option "Allow unregistered&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;guests", on "Browser-based authentication" configuration window&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Configured a a rule from:guest_network to:internet action:accept&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Used AD user groups on every other rule.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Now, guest users on the guest network can click on "I don't have a username and password" and register to use the internet. It can be a fake name.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Users in the internal network will have to authenticate with a valid AD user to do anything.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It is not ideal, but it works.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 13:51:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7095#M126</guid>
      <dc:creator>Pedro_Espindola</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-06T13:51:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7096#M127</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;That definitely sounds like a better option.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 16:36:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/7096#M127</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhoneBoy</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-06T16:36:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/67846#M2624</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Just ran into this myself. Browser Based User Awareness is indeed pretty lame. Its a shame that this is %100 doable if the smb is controlled by a mgmt server.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 02:45:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/67846#M2624</guid>
      <dc:creator>John_Fleming</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-11-20T02:45:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Create a Captive Portal exception rule on SMB</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/67851#M2625</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I agree.&amp;nbsp; You should be able to control the User Awareness rules with more granular controls, like identity awareness/legacy client authentication.&amp;nbsp; Your subnets shouldn't be held hostage and require authentication just because you need specific users to authenticate.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 03:38:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Spark-Firewall-SMB/Create-a-Captive-Portal-exception-rule-on-SMB/m-p/67851#M2625</guid>
      <dc:creator>Max_Baumgarten</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-11-20T03:38:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

