Policy Auditor: Turning Access Control Policy Review into Intent-Based Segmentation Validation Par 2

[WiliRGasparetto]

Policy Auditor: Turning Access Control Policy Review into Intent-Based Segmentation Validation Par 2

 To view part one of this post, go to this link: https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/Policy-Auditor-Turning-Access-C...

8 Practical production approach

I would not start by creating one very large guideline for the entire environment.

A safer and more useful approach is to start with high-value areas.

Goal:

Find obvious segmentation violations.

Goal:

Validate that sensitive areas are not exposed by overly broad rules.

Goal:

Understand whether lateral communication between branches is aligned with the design.

Phase 4 — Cloud and Data Center

Goal:

Validate whether cloud connectivity follows the approved access model.

9 Known limitations and prerequisites

Before using Policy Auditor, it is important to validate the requirements.

Prerequisites:

R82 Jumbo Hotfix Accumulator Take 103
R82 SmartConsole Build 1065 or higher
Valid Policy Auditor license

Known limitations include:

Up to 12 segments in one set of guidelines
Supported objects in network groups include IPv4 networks and IPv4 hosts
Inspection of globally assigned rules in a Multi-Domain environment is not supported
After upgrade or migration, guidelines must be recalculated
Calculations are preserved when installing a Jumbo Hotfix

These limitations do not reduce the value of the feature, but they define how it should be planned and operated.

10 Policy Auditor Scheduler

Another important part of the feature is the scheduler.

Policy Auditor can automatically recalculate guidelines once every 24 hours.

This allows Policy Auditor to become part of a continuous governance process instead of being used only as a manual one-time review.

Relevant scheduler parameters include:

NGM_MATRIX_SCHEDULER_CRON
NGM_MATRIX_SCHEDULER_DURATION_HOURS
NGM_MATRIX_SCHEDULER_WAIT_TIME
NGM_MATRIX_SCHEDULER_MAX_CONCURRENT
NGM_MATRIX_SCHEDULER_KILL_SWITCH

 This is especially relevant in larger environments or Multi-Domain environments, where recalculation must be controlled by:

Execution time window
Cooldown between guideline calculations
Concurrent recalculation tasks
Emergency stop capability

11 Applying scheduler changes

For immediate and temporary changes, the configuration can be applied with:

bash
/opt/CPsuite-<version_of_management_server>/fw1/scripts/reload_env_vars.sh -e "VARIABLE=value"

For persistent changes on a Security Management Server:

bash
$FWDIR/scripts/override_server_setting.sh -e VARIABLE value

For persistent changes on a Multi-Domain Server:

bash
$MDS_FWDIR/scripts/override_server_setting.sh -e VARIABLE value

For urgent changes, such as an emergency stop, it may be necessary to apply both immediate and persistent changes.

 Example goals:

Schedule calculation to 02:00 AM
Set calculation window to 4 hours
Emergency stop
Resume after sto

12 Troubleshooting the scheduler

 This is important because in larger environments the scheduler itself becomes part of the operational design.

It should be monitored and tuned carefully.

13 Anti-patterns Policy Auditor can help expose

Policy Auditor can help identify rules that are common in real environments but risky from a segmentation perspective.

 Anti-pattern 1 — Any as a permanent solution

Source: Users
Destination: Data Center
Service: Any
Action: Accept

Anti-pattern 2 — DMZ initiating broad internal access

Source: DMZ
Destination: Internal Networks
Service: Any
Action: Accept

Anti-pattern 3 — Branch-to-branch lateral communication

Source: Branches
Destination: Branches
Service: Any
Action: Accept

Anti-pattern 4 — Cloud treated as a fully trusted internal network

Source: Public Cloud
Destination: Internal Networks
Service: Any
Action: Accept

Anti-pattern 5 — Temporary exception without governance

Temporary rule
No owner
No expiration
No business justification
No review cycle

These are not always firewall errors.

But they can represent drift from the intended security model.

14 How I would operationalize Policy Auditor

The tool itself does not create governance.

It must be connected to a process.

A practical operating model could be:

1. Define critical segments
   2. Create guidelines by area
   3. Run initial calculation
   4. Review violating rules
   5. Approve legitimate exceptions with justification
   6. Remediate rules that violate the intent
   7. Adjust guidelines when needed
   8. Schedule automatic recalculation
   9. Review violations periodically
   10. Report trends to architecture and security leadership
   
   

Useful metrics:

Number of violating rules
Number of approved violations
Old approved violations without review
Most violated source/destination pairs
Critical segmentation boundary violations
Trend over time

This turns Policy Auditor into a security maturity control.

15  Final thoughts

Policy Auditor is an important addition because it helps close a very real gap:

The policy the organization believes it has
vs
The policy that is actually implemented

The feature is not just about finding bad rules.

It is about validating whether the Access Control Rule Base aligns with the organization’s security intent.

That is a powerful shift.

The discussion moves from:

Is this rule working?

to:

Should this traffic exist between these segments?

That question is much more aligned with Zero Trust, segmentation, compliance and modern security architecture.

For me, Policy Auditor should not replace rule review, logs, ownership validation or recertification.

But it can become a very strong control when combined with:

Rule usage
Traffic logs
Application ownership
Business justification
Change control
Risk acceptance
Segmentation design

In large environments, especially with hybrid cloud, branches, DMZ, OT, VPNs and historical rules, this feature can help teams move from reactive cleanup to structured policy governance.

Discussion

How do you plan to use Policy Auditor?

Would you start with macro segmentation or critical zones such as OT, DMZ and Management?

How would you govern approved violations?

Do you see Policy Auditor mainly as an audit tool, an architecture validation tool, or an operational governance tool?

[KirillMuravyev]

Hello @WiliRGasparetto Thanks for the post!

Planning to use policy auditor just as you described, I have couple of questions here:

1. How a rule with security zone object in source/destination will be evaluated by policy auditor? Will those rules be like - "all is fine" or how will they appear in the report?

2. Once I have an approved violation rules, will those rules be evaluated again during next calculation? Imagine we change that rule, what will happen?

3. How rules that do not match the evaluation of policy editor appear in the report? 

[WiliRGasparetto]

Hello @KirillMuravyev , your questions are very interesting; I will answer them below.

1 The Compliance Blade (Policy Auditor) evaluates rules against defined security best practices. If a rule uses a security zone object for the source or destination, it is analyzed based on the criteria of those best practices. In the report, the rule may appear as "compliant" (all good) or as a recommendation for adjustment, depending on whether or not it meets the established security requirements. If the rule is not evaluated (for example, if it does not apply to that specific best practice), it may appear as "N/A" (not applicable) in the report.

2 Yes, even after a violation (exclusion or exception) is approved, the rules are re-evaluated during each new Compliance Blade calculation (full scan). If the rule is modified after the violation has been approved, a new scan is required for the system to re-evaluate compliance with that rule. Changes to the rule may render the previous exception invalid, necessitating a new analysis.

3 Regras que não correspondem à avaliação (ou seja, que não se encaixam nas melhores práticas avaliadas) podem aparecer como "N/A" (não aplicável) no relatório. Isso significa que aquela regra específica não foi considerada para determinada melhor prática, seja por não se aplicar ao contexto ou por limitações do escopo da avaliação.

I would point you to the official SK site for more information, but if you have any other questions, feel free to post them here or reach out to me.

https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk120256

[KirillMuravyev]

Thanks for the reply @WiliRGasparetto 

You mentioning compliance blade, but is policy auditor really part of it? I have compliance blade turned off on my SMS but I still can use policy auditor and evaluate rules

[WiliRGasparetto]

Hmm, I've never used SME, but I can check and let you know.