- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
Policy Insights and Policy Auditor in Action
19 November @ 5pm CET / 11am ET
Access Control and Threat Prevention Best Practices
Watch HereOverlap in Security Validation
Help us to understand your needs better
CheckMates Go:
Maestro Madness
Is it possible to copy all firewall, QoS rules from a simplified policy to a traditional policy?
This exact problem (and solution) is here: Excluding subnets in encryption domain from accessing a specific VPN community
Traditional Mode policies have been discouraged since at least NG (R5x) versions.
In R80, the ability to create new Traditional Mode policies was removed and isn't coming back.
What's the real problem you're trying to solve?
Let's find a way to solve that in a way that doesn't involve Traditional Mode policies.
Hello Dameon,
Thank you first.
I have a IPsec VPN established and I need to forward all Internet traffic to this tunnel, but only one internal subnet must be affected on tihs.
How can I do this using communities?
This exact problem (and solution) is here: Excluding subnets in encryption domain from accessing a specific VPN community
Thank you Dameon.
I want to send to that tunnel only requests from 192.168.1.0/24 going to the Internet (example);
Thinking on that, I will need to exclude all my internal subnets going to the Internet, example:
// // User defined INSPECT code // vpn_exclude_src={<192.168.1.1,192.168.1.254>}; vpn_exclude_dst={<I need to put all Internet IPs here?>}; #ifndef IPV6_FLAVORipv #define NON_VPN_TRAFFIC_RULES ((src in vpn_exclude_src) and (dst in vpn_exclude_dst)) #else #define NON_VPN_TRAFFIC_RULES 0 #endifSo, I'll need to put all Internet IPs on vpn_exclude_dst?
Correct.
All IPs can be represented using the range specified in the All_Internet object, which is <0.0.0.0,255.255.255.255>.
Thanks
And a curious thing: why Check Point does not put this kind of configuration in the Smart Dashboard?
I personally hadn't heard of this specific use case before.
Uhmmm... but this case does not sounds like a not common case.
If it was a common case, we will not have a SK to this kind of situation...
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 25 | |
| 19 | |
| 14 | |
| 12 | |
| 12 | |
| 10 | |
| 6 | |
| 6 | |
| 5 | |
| 4 |
Wed 19 Nov 2025 @ 11:00 AM (EST)
TechTalk: Improve Your Security Posture with Threat Prevention and Policy InsightsThu 20 Nov 2025 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
Hacking LLM Applications: latest research and insights from our LLM pen testing projects - AMERThu 20 Nov 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CST)
Hacking LLM Applications: latest research and insights from our LLM pen testing projects - EMEAWed 26 Nov 2025 @ 12:00 PM (COT)
Panama City: Risk Management a la Parrilla: ERM, TEM & Meat LunchWed 19 Nov 2025 @ 11:00 AM (EST)
TechTalk: Improve Your Security Posture with Threat Prevention and Policy InsightsThu 20 Nov 2025 @ 05:00 PM (CET)
Hacking LLM Applications: latest research and insights from our LLM pen testing projects - AMERThu 20 Nov 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CST)
Hacking LLM Applications: latest research and insights from our LLM pen testing projects - EMEAThu 04 Dec 2025 @ 12:30 PM (SGT)
End-of-Year Event: Securing AI Transformation in a Hyperconnected World - APACThu 04 Dec 2025 @ 03:00 PM (CET)
End-of-Year Event: Securing AI Transformation in a Hyperconnected World - EMEAWed 26 Nov 2025 @ 12:00 PM (COT)
Panama City: Risk Management a la Parrilla: ERM, TEM & Meat LunchAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY