Inconsistency in Checkpoint Access Control Rules Search Results on Smart Console

[#1]

While using the search functionality of Checkpoint access control rules, while utilizing comments as search criteria, has revealed a notable inconsistency in the search results. When initiating a search, the search bar indicates the presence of four rules matching the specified criteria; however, upon examination, the displayed results showcase only a single matching rule.

In an effort to comprehensively analyse the issue, we have undertaken the exportation of the rules.  Even in the exported data, we could identify only one rule corresponding to the search parameters.

Any insights or guidance you can provide to expedite the resolution of this matter would be greatly appreciated.

[#2]

While using the search functionality of Checkpoint access control rules, while utilizing comments as search criteria, has revealed a notable inconsistency in the search results. When initiating a search, the search bar indicates the presence of four rules matching the specified criteria; however, upon examination, the displayed results showcase only a single matching rule.

In an effort to comprehensively analyse the issue, we have undertaken the exportation of the rules.  Even in the exported data, we could identify only one rule corresponding to the search parameters.

Any insights or guidance you can provide to expedite the resolution of this matter would be greatly appreciated.

[#3]

While using the search functionality of Checkpoint access control rules, while utilizing comments as search criteria, has revealed a notable inconsistency in the search results. When initiating a search, the search bar indicates the presence of four rules matching the specified criteria; however, upon examination, the displayed results showcase only a single matching rule.

In an effort to comprehensively analyse the issue, we have undertaken the exportation of the rules.  Even in the exported data, we could identify only one rule corresponding to the search parameters.

Any insights or guidance you can provide to expedite the resolution of this matter would be greatly appreciated.

[#4]

While using the search functionality of Checkpoint access control rules, while utilizing comments as search criteria, has revealed a notable inconsistency in the search results. When initiating a search, the search bar indicates the presence of four rules matching the specified criteria; however, upon examination, the displayed results showcase only a single matching rule.

In an effort to comprehensively analyse the issue, we have undertaken the exportation of the rules.  Even in the exported data, we could identify only one rule corresponding to the search parameters.

Any insights or guidance you can provide to expedite the resolution of this matter would be greatly appreciated.

[#5]

While using the search functionality of Checkpoint access control rules, while utilizing comments as search criteria, has revealed a notable inconsistency in the search results. When initiating a search, the search bar indicates the presence of four rules matching the specified criteria; however, upon examination, the displayed results showcase only a single matching rule.

In an effort to comprehensively analyse the issue, we have undertaken the exportation of the rules.  Even in the exported data, we could identify only one rule corresponding to the search parameters.

Any insights or guidance you can provide to expedite the resolution of this matter would be greatly appreciated.

[Bachan]

Thanks for your prompt response and sharing your inputs on the case. Since you mentioned that this was reported in version R80.XX, so could you please advise as to how we used to resolve this kind of issue on older versions? Was there any bugs which used to result in this issue as we can see build 416 is relatively new (released in July 2023). 

[Bachan]

Thanks for your prompt response and sharing your inputs on the case. Since you mentioned that this was reported in version R80.XX, so could you please advise as to how we used to resolve this kind of issue on older versions? Was there any bugs which used to result in this issue as we can see build 416 is relatively new (released in July 2023). 

[Bachan]

Thanks for your prompt response and sharing your inputs on the case. Since you mentioned that this was reported in version R80.XX, so could you please advise as to how we used to resolve this kind of issue on older versions? Was there any bugs which used to result in this issue as we can see build 416 is relatively new (released in July 2023). 

[Bachan]

Thanks for your prompt response and sharing your inputs on the case. Since you mentioned that this was reported in version R80.XX, so could you please advise as to how we used to resolve this kind of issue on older versions? Was there any bugs which used to result in this issue as we can see build 416 is relatively new (released in July 2023). 

[the_rock]

No no, Im NOT saying it was reported back in R80.xx, Im saying I noticed it in those versions, but never in R81+. I dont believe its known bug though...you can certainly check with TAC.

Andy

[the_rock]

No no, Im NOT saying it was reported back in R80.xx, Im saying I noticed it in those versions, but never in R81+. I dont believe its known bug though...you can certainly check with TAC.

Andy

[the_rock]

No no, Im NOT saying it was reported back in R80.xx, Im saying I noticed it in those versions, but never in R81+. I dont believe its known bug though...you can certainly check with TAC.

Andy

[the_rock]

No no, Im NOT saying it was reported back in R80.xx, Im saying I noticed it in those versions, but never in R81+. I dont believe its known bug though...you can certainly check with TAC.

Andy

[PhoneBoy]

Version/JHF of management and build of SmartConsole?
In any case, this will probably require TAC assistance: https://help.checkpoint.com 

[PhoneBoy]

Version/JHF of management and build of SmartConsole?
In any case, this will probably require TAC assistance: https://help.checkpoint.com 

[PhoneBoy]

Version/JHF of management and build of SmartConsole?
In any case, this will probably require TAC assistance: https://help.checkpoint.com 

[PhoneBoy]

Version/JHF of management and build of SmartConsole?
In any case, this will probably require TAC assistance: https://help.checkpoint.com 

[the_rock]

I agree with that 100%

Andy

[the_rock]

I agree with that 100%

Andy

[the_rock]

I agree with that 100%

Andy

[the_rock]

I agree with that 100%

Andy

[AaronPW]

I see this as well. I will do a search on policy rules for telnet.  I get a result of 25 rules but no rules are listed under the search results.  I get this on all of my sites on pretty much every search where the listed rules don't match the number of matches listed. We just updated the SmartConsole server to R81.20.  This makes is very difficult to do rule audits. I was hoping there was something I was missing. 

[AaronPW]

I see this as well. I will do a search on policy rules for telnet.  I get a result of 25 rules but no rules are listed under the search results.  I get this on all of my sites on pretty much every search where the listed rules don't match the number of matches listed. We just updated the SmartConsole server to R81.20.  This makes is very difficult to do rule audits. I was hoping there was something I was missing. 

[AaronPW]

I see this as well. I will do a search on policy rules for telnet.  I get a result of 25 rules but no rules are listed under the search results.  I get this on all of my sites on pretty much every search where the listed rules don't match the number of matches listed. We just updated the SmartConsole server to R81.20.  This makes is very difficult to do rule audits. I was hoping there was something I was missing. 

[AaronPW]

I see this as well. I will do a search on policy rules for telnet.  I get a result of 25 rules but no rules are listed under the search results.  I get this on all of my sites on pretty much every search where the listed rules don't match the number of matches listed. We just updated the SmartConsole server to R81.20.  This makes is very difficult to do rule audits. I was hoping there was something I was missing. 

[the_rock]

Thats definitely same thing I see as well, latest R81.20 smart console. I assume its by design, but I get what you are saying, it would be nice is search results actually gave the rules in question.

Maybe that will come with R82, not sure...

Andy

[the_rock]

Thats definitely same thing I see as well, latest R81.20 smart console. I assume its by design, but I get what you are saying, it would be nice is search results actually gave the rules in question.

Maybe that will come with R82, not sure...

Andy

[the_rock]

Thats definitely same thing I see as well, latest R81.20 smart console. I assume its by design, but I get what you are saying, it would be nice is search results actually gave the rules in question.

Maybe that will come with R82, not sure...

Andy

[the_rock]

Thats definitely same thing I see as well, latest R81.20 smart console. I assume its by design, but I get what you are saying, it would be nice is search results actually gave the rules in question.

Maybe that will come with R82, not sure...

Andy