- CheckMates
- :
- Products
- :
- Quantum
- :
- Security Gateways
- :
- weird behaviour
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
Are you a member of CheckMates?
×- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
weird behaviour
Hi
I'm curious about the routing logic for this traffic. Can you take a look at the attached image? There appear to be three green logs relevant to the issue.
I wonder why the traffic would be sent like that (not inside tunnel) !
the first: accept by network rule and URL rule.
the second: accept by network rule but URL, CPNotEnoughDataForRuleMatch!
the third: same as the second, and then it does as it configured to do through tunnel!
10.80.91 is an internal server in central office 192.168.3.11 is a printer in branch office
Why is that happening?
Accepted Solutions
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
The CPNotEnoughDataForRuleMatch log suggests the first "Possible Match" rule in your URL and App Policy involves App Control.
This message pops up because the connection terminated before the system could identify what application it was.
I would strongly suggest adding a rule at/near the top that allows the required traffic only by a simple TCP service.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Both tcp ports do not work 9090 and 9091? Does any traffic work at all between 10.80.91 and 192.168.3.11?
If you like this post please give a thumbs up(kudo)! 🙂
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Some traffic is going between these, print server and a printer. Server is trying to add the printer but fails!
How do you see that these ports do not work?
I could find these logs:
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Read below post, it will answer your question.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
So, if i suspect ra routing loop, how to investiagte that?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
tcpdump is the friend you need in this case 🙂
Or check routing table of fw, and check routing table of next hop. Compare them.
If they point the network to each other you have loop.
If you like this post please give a thumbs up(kudo)! 🙂
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
tcpdump, fw monitor
My colleague made this site ages ago, its super helpful.
Andy
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
The CPNotEnoughDataForRuleMatch log suggests the first "Possible Match" rule in your URL and App Policy involves App Control.
This message pops up because the connection terminated before the system could identify what application it was.
I would strongly suggest adding a rule at/near the top that allows the required traffic only by a simple TCP service.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
What PhoneBoy suggested is the solution
I strongly suggest to use URLF/APPC blade only inside inline layers well organized
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Note that if you have a rule using an application object instead of a plain TCP service object, and you test the connection with telnet, netcat, Test-NetConnection, and so on, you will get this CPNotEnoughDataForRuleMatch "Connection terminated before the Security Gateway was able to make a decision" message. These tools don't send actual application traffic, so the firewall can't be sure the traffic actually is the application you have specified in the rule.
