How to avoid Old Policies to show up when you right click an object and then click "where used" in SmartConsole.

[Evren_Buyer]

I don't know when I first noticed the problem but it's definitely started after the replacement of smartdashboard vs SmartConsole.

When you rightclick/where-used any object from anywhere in SmartConsole to learn where that object(s) used in the policies my deleted, non-exist- policies show up and make it hard to seek where the object is used in policy.

Is there a way to avoid of old policies to show up in the search pane?

You may see the situation below.

[Evren_Buyer]

And if you want to open already deleted policy, through the where used screen you get the error below:

[Evren_Buyer]

I think it's same issue as described in Duplicate objects, IPS profiles, policies are displayed in R80 / R80.10 SmartConsole  So I'll contact support ASAP to verfiy and fix the problem...

[Martijn]

Hi,

Is this solved yet?

I have the same issue at a customer who cannot disable Anti Bot on a gateway because the gateway object is used in a Threat Prevention policy that does not excist anymore.

When we check 'Where Used' on the gateway object we can see the Threat Prevention policy but when we try to open it, we see the same error as above: 'Could not open the requested policy'.

A search with GUI DB Edit does not show the deleted policy.

Regards,

Martijn.

[Tomer_Sole · Accepted solution]

Check Point Support is the way to go.

[Martijn]

Hi,

I have a case open with support, but customers policy does not allow sending site related information such as cpinfo and configuration files outside the organization. So Check Point support is limited in what they can do for me.

So I hope someone within CheckMates has the solution maybe.

Regards,

Martijn.

[Alejandro_Mont1]

Did you try sk116056? If that fails I'm not sure if anyone here will be able to assist as manually modifying solr or postgres is quite tricky and each environment is different.

[Martijn]

Hi Alejandro,

I have asked support if sk116056 is relevant in my case, but I also wanted to know if this sk article solved the issue for Evren.

Regards,

Martijn.