- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
Scaling Check Point Automation with Arodonata
7 October @ 5pm CET / 11am EDT
AI Security Masters
LGTM: Bypassing an LLM Build Gate
When Prompt Injection Fails
What's New in Check Point SASE
The State of Ransomware Q2 2026:
This Quarter's Trends, and Their Impact on Your Defenses
CheckMates Go:
Half is Not Enough
SMS: R81.10 JHF 152 - GW: R81.10 JHF 150
It seems the reference numbers for our UserCheck do not match. Has anyone come across this before? I was not finding anything on a quick search.
I'm having a hard time replicating the issue. Everything I have tested this afternoon has come back proper, but yeah the databases are up-to-date.
Hm, never paid attention to it, but have fully working https inspection in R81.20 and R82, so let me verify.
Andy
Maybe if you are using custom user check, default ones work fine, though I also verified custom one in my labs, no issues. I tested both R82 and R81.20, different categories, all match 100%
Andy
We are using a custom page, but we are using the built-in Incident ID variable just as you are.
Dies it show same for any category?
Andy
Yeah, the category matches. What is interesting is that the log message says it displayed the proper reference ID, but it didn't.
I meant is ID different no matter what category is blocked? Did you make sure app control and urlf databases are updated from smart console?
Andy
I'm having a hard time replicating the issue. Everything I have tested this afternoon has come back proper, but yeah the databases are up-to-date.
Happy to show you my lab on Tuesday, as its holiday here in Canada on Monday and you can verify anything needed. My lab works 100% of the time, no issues when it comes to https inspection. Yes, its basic, but very good reference.
Andy
Thanks! I'll keep that in mind, but we are okay for now.
I was thinking it could be a webpage cache issue on the PC, but I searched our logs and found nothing tied to that reference number in the last 120 days. Since I can't recreate it, I think I will let it go for now.
K, no worries. If you need help, hit me up any time, lab is always in "good standing" 🙂
Andy
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 34 | |
| 7 | |
| 6 | |
| 5 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 |
Thu 01 Oct 2026 @ 05:00 PM (CEST)
Under the Hood: Check Point WAF | Preventing minus-zero-day attacksTue 06 Oct 2026 @ 12:00 PM (ACDT)
Rethinking Network Security for the AI Era : Session 2 - From User, to Branch and Campus APACThu 01 Oct 2026 @ 05:00 PM (CEST)
Under the Hood: Check Point WAF | Preventing minus-zero-day attacksTue 06 Oct 2026 @ 12:00 PM (ACDT)
Rethinking Network Security for the AI Era : Session 2 - From User, to Branch and Campus APACTue 06 Oct 2026 @ 03:00 PM (CEST)
Rethinking Network Security for the AI Era : Session 2 - From User, to Branch and Campus EMEAAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY