- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
MVP 2026: Submissions
Are Now Open!
What's New in R82.10?
10 December @ 5pm CET / 11am ET
Announcing Quantum R82.10!
Learn MoreOverlap in Security Validation
Help us to understand your needs better
CheckMates Go:
Maestro Madness
Our ISSO wants to do nessus scanning for vulnerabilities even though we already have the compliance blade. Is there any reason not to? Has anyone run into issues with creating a user for nessus & letting it scan the firewall? Is anyone else scanning their firewalls with Nessus?
I've requested in the past that CP adds CVE to the compliance blade. It seems like it would be an easy and very helpful addition. I know we have the web page that show the CVEs but this way we would also know which ones we've patched.
message from ISSO
Show me a report showing vulnerabilities report. However, all I’ve seen are compliance reports. Those are like CIS reports, not vulnerability reports. Very different. However, both are important.
I’m looking for something that shows the current vulnerabilities (CVE’s) on the system.
If you can produce that from the firewall not from a checkpoint list I’ll let it go. If not, I really want a verified scan of the Firewall’s OS from Nessus.
Compliance its not the same as the vulnerabilities scanning, he would need to do a credentialed scan of the FW with Nessus. Any vulnerabilities would then need to be remediated in order to be in compliance with a specific security framework or internal policy. In case the scan is for the network the firewall shall not be in between as false positives or IPS may block scanning and/or not proper scanning would work.
Thats a good point...maybe someone can confirm, but I dont believe you would get current vulnerabilities on the system with compliance blade. I will do some lab testing and check for you.
Andy
Compliance its not the same as the vulnerabilities scanning, he would need to do a credentialed scan of the FW with Nessus. Any vulnerabilities would then need to be remediated in order to be in compliance with a specific security framework or internal policy. In case the scan is for the network the firewall shall not be in between as false positives or IPS may block scanning and/or not proper scanning would work.
Thats true brother, I mixed up the two : - )
The only complication I can see is that Nessus recommends the same UID of 0 (the same as the admin user) for the two new users.
You should also consider sk100647 when you review your scanning results.
Did you work with your local SE to open an RFE for this?
(For awareness there is also some coverage here in other areas e.g. PRO support.)
As your ISSO and others have highlighted these serve different purposes.
Though some might also question the usefulness of scanning a Firewall with Nessus, it sounds like independent/external validation is what your after.
done, o91118xT0
Yeah, CVE scans are different than the compliance blade CIS style reports, but it seems like a perfect add-on to the compliance blade which is already doing scans.
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 16 | |
| 13 | |
| 8 | |
| 7 | |
| 6 | |
| 4 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 2 | |
| 2 |
Fri 12 Dec 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Check Mates Live Netherlands: #41 AI & Multi Context ProtocolFri 12 Dec 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CET)
Check Mates Live Netherlands: #41 AI & Multi Context ProtocolTue 16 Dec 2025 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
Under the Hood: CloudGuard Network Security for Oracle Cloud - Config and Autoscaling!About CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY