- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
The Great Exposure Reset
24 February 2026 @ 5pm CET / 11am EST
AI Security Masters E4:
Introducing Cyata - Securing the Agenic AI Era
AI Security Masters E3:
AI-Generated Malware
CheckMates Go:
CheckMates Fest
Has anyone tried to create a category for unallowed domains, like webhook.site?
https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2025/09/23/widespread-supply-chain-compromise-impacting-npm-... We're blocking traffic to the domain webhook.site currently. Rather than maintaining a rule getting 0 hits, is there an application control category to block traffic to webhook.site? How do you look up to see if an IP or domain falls into an already existing category?
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: webhook.site
Addresses: 2a01:4f8:121:114d::2
2a01:4f8:121:11a5::2
178.63.67.153
178.63.67.106
Going custom objects is probably the path here purely from a URLF perspective.
Last i looked at this it was more a case of a legitimate online service being misused meaning it potentially falls outside the normal use case of URLF based on categories alone.
Suspect it would fit into Computers / Internet / Business but you can check it here: https://usercenter.checkpoint.com/ucapps/urlcat/
Hey Dan,
Here is what MS copilot gave me. This is on "deep think" setting, whatever that means lol
***************************
Here is a ready‑to‑paste definition for Check Point:
webhook.site
*.webhook.site
emailhook.site
*.emailhook.site
dnshook.site
*.dnshook.site
178.63.67.153
178.63.67.106
168.119.249.101
2a01:4f8:121:114d::2
2a01:4f8:121:11a5::2
Going custom objects is probably the path here purely from a URLF perspective.
Last i looked at this it was more a case of a legitimate online service being misused meaning it potentially falls outside the normal use case of URLF based on categories alone.
Suspect it would fit into Computers / Internet / Business but you can check it here: https://usercenter.checkpoint.com/ucapps/urlcat/
I made a recommendation that it gets re-categorized to malicious sites based on Widespread Supply Chain Compromise Impacting npm Ecosystem | CISA Maybe, check point can create a new category like application control jail. For temporary sites that are out of compliance.
Always good idea to send a request.
Hey Dan,
Here is what MS copilot gave me. This is on "deep think" setting, whatever that means lol
***************************
Here is a ready‑to‑paste definition for Check Point:
webhook.site
*.webhook.site
emailhook.site
*.emailhook.site
dnshook.site
*.dnshook.site
178.63.67.153
178.63.67.106
168.119.249.101
2a01:4f8:121:114d::2
2a01:4f8:121:11a5::2
I would recommend adding either both of these for exclusively blocking a domain (none regex custom application):
webhook.site
www.webhook.site
Or this for blocking both the domain and its subdomains:
*webhook.site
Regarding the main topic -
If there are many URLs / Domains / IPs we need to block (and maintain & update the list), then IoC feeds or External Network Feeds would be best approach.
For a smaller list of just URLs - a custom application object would suffice.
Im with you, totally agree. I just have bad habit of doing *domain* to exempt these things, but of course thats not close to optimal solution, I just found myself too many times in the past troubleshooting these things for hours on end.
Here is what url lookup shows:
Current Categories: Computers / Internet, Low Risk
Computers / Internet
This category is intended to cover websites related to computing software and hardware, as well as Internet and technology-related companies. This includes, but is not limited to vendors, product reviews, and deployment and maintenance of software and hardware. This also includes addons such as scripts, plugins, drivers, peripherals, and other equipment used in conjunction with computers and networks. Examples: http://www.archive.org, http://www.verisign.com, http://www.limewire.com, http://www.w3schools.com
Low Risk
Applications and Websites that are potentially non business related yet low risk.
Hello
I'm the founder of Webhook.site. I found this via Google Alerts. In case you didn't know, we have thousands of paying customers using Webhook.site for testing webhooks, building workflows and other purposes, so it is worrying that some of our users are seeing their access blocked. Here's some more info about our company: https://docs.webhook.site/#what-is-webhooksite
Where can we report this false positive? Thanks.
To contrary the access is not blocked by default, some community members are requesting better ways of blocking hosted elements should they choose to.
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 43 | |
| 26 | |
| 14 | |
| 13 | |
| 12 | |
| 8 | |
| 7 | |
| 6 | |
| 6 | |
| 6 |
Tue 24 Feb 2026 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Latest updates on Quantum Spark including R82 features and Spark Management zero touch - EMEAThu 26 Feb 2026 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
AI Security Masters Session 4: Introducing Cyata, Securing the Agentic AI EraTue 03 Mar 2026 @ 04:00 PM (CET)
Maestro Masters EMEA: Introduction to Maestro Hyperscale FirewallsTue 03 Mar 2026 @ 03:00 PM (EST)
Maestro Masters Americas: Introduction to Maestro Hyperscale FirewallsTue 24 Feb 2026 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Latest updates on Quantum Spark including R82 features and Spark Management zero touch - EMEAThu 26 Feb 2026 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
AI Security Masters Session 4: Introducing Cyata, Securing the Agentic AI EraTue 03 Mar 2026 @ 04:00 PM (CET)
Maestro Masters EMEA: Introduction to Maestro Hyperscale FirewallsTue 03 Mar 2026 @ 03:00 PM (EST)
Maestro Masters Americas: Introduction to Maestro Hyperscale FirewallsFri 06 Mar 2026 @ 08:00 AM (COT)
Check Point R82 Hands‑On Bootcamp – Comunidad DOJO PanamáAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY