- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
Step Into the Future of
AI-Powered Cyber Security
The State of Ransomware Q1 2026
Key Trends and Their Impact
AI Security Masters E8:
Claude Mythos: New Era in Cyber Security
Blueprint Architecture for Securing
The AI Factory & AI Data Center
Call For Papers
Your Expertise. Our Stage
CheckMates Go:
CheckMates Fest
Hi everyone.
I'm having the following issue, which you can see in the attached image. Attempts to the same destination are being both allowed and blocked. They fall under different rules, as if the domain object isn't detecting them.
Do you know what could be causing this?
Are you finding that the rule with the Domain object is not being matched when attempts are made to connect to the destination using the DNS names, but it is intermittent?
Those logs look around 1 hour apart, which makes it look like a 1 hour caching timeout but non-FQDN objects (Domain Objects) aren't cached for an hour they are resolved with DNS lookups (see below), and then held in a different cache by the looks of it.
Maybe a cache full problem..
Did you check on the gateways command line with nslookup or ping, and check the DNS configuration on the gateways?
Try this on the gateway in expert mode:
domains_tool -ip 54.166.251.207
These show table summaries (-s), and #VALS is current number of entries:
fw ctl multik print_bl dns_reverse_cache_tbl -s
fw ctl multik print_bl dns_reverse_unmatched_cache -s
fw ctl multik print_bl dns_reverse_domains_tbl -s
Also try hcp -r all
You may have to open a ticket with TAC if you can't see anything obvious and AWS isn't broken in some way (again).
From: https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk90401
When a connection that traverses the Security Gateway is being evaluated against the rulebase, if the Unified Policy mechanism encounters a possible match that includes a Domain Object, the object must be resolved before a verdict can be reached.
The Time-to-Live (TTL) for FQDN cache is 60 minutes. When using FQDN mode, all Domain Objects are refreshed once per minute. To refresh the Domain Object resolution, the Security Gateway queries all defined DNS servers for both "domain.com" and "www.domain.com" from the Domain Object.
For FQDN queries that return multiple results, there is no individual limit on the number of cached IP addresses per Domain Object. The Security Gateway's full cache size for Domain Objects maxes out at 25000 entries.
If changes are made to the Security Gateway's defined DNS servers, the WSDNSD process must be restarted to apply the changes to the resolution of Domain Objects.
To observe Domain Object resolution, use the domains_tool command:
[Expert@SecurityGateway]# domains_tool {-ip <IP address> | -d <domain name> [ -m] | -uo <updatable object name> | -hc | -report }[Expert@SecurityGateway]# domains_tool {-ip <IP address> | -d <domain name> [ -m] | -uo <updatable object name> }For more information on how to use domains_tool, refer to sk161632.
I believe the answer is "given" in your screenshots. Look at tne 2nd one you attached...clearly shows geo location, so please make sure you dont have geo policy where specific country is blocked.
Is this not a better solution?
Check Point Updatable Objects are used for allowing or blocking network access (IP's/URL's) of known external services such as Office365 and Amazon Web Services.
This is performed dynamically and updated periodically from the service providers themselves, with no policy installation required.
Updatable Objects update occurs on first time initialization of the service or periodically (default: every hour).
Disable FQDN check box has an affect to increase the load on the gw. This is now also reported in HCP reports.
I would agree.
I always avoid using of none FQDN objects, they are not efficiently. Reverse dns lookups for a lot of packets results in latency. Use updatable objects instead.
If none FQDN objects really needed follow Domain Object Enhancement - DNS Passive Learning and activate DNS passive learning.
In my personal experience, as long as there is not lots of those, its not too bad.
Hey mate,
Were you able to figure this out?
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 24 | |
| 19 | |
| 10 | |
| 9 | |
| 8 | |
| 7 | |
| 6 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 4 |
Fri 29 May 2026 @ 09:00 AM (EDT)
Caracas: Executive Breakfast: Innovación en Ciberseguridad – IA y Threat IntelligenceTue 02 Jun 2026 @ 06:00 PM (IDT)
Under the Hood | Check Point SASE: Identity Integration & Access Policy Design Best PracticesThu 04 Jun 2026 @ 02:00 PM (CEST)
Deep Dive Webinar: New CloudGuard GWLB Deployment Without NAT Gateways - EuropeTue 02 Jun 2026 @ 06:00 PM (IDT)
Under the Hood | Check Point SASE: Identity Integration & Access Policy Design Best PracticesThu 04 Jun 2026 @ 02:00 PM (CEST)
Deep Dive Webinar: New CloudGuard GWLB Deployment Without NAT Gateways - EuropeThu 04 Jun 2026 @ 07:00 PM (IDT)
Deep Dive Webinar: New CloudGuard GWLB Deployment Without NAT Gateways - AmericaFri 12 Jun 2026 @ 10:00 AM (CEST)
CheckMates Live Netherlands - Sessie 47: Continuous Threat Exposure ManagementFri 29 May 2026 @ 09:00 AM (EDT)
Caracas: Executive Breakfast: Innovación en Ciberseguridad – IA y Threat IntelligenceAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY