- Products
- Learn
- Local User Groups
- Partners
- More
Introduction to Lakera:
Securing the AI Frontier!
Quantum Spark Management Unleashed!
Check Point Named Leader
2025 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ for Hybrid Mesh Firewall
HTTPS Inspection
Help us to understand your needs better
CheckMates Go:
SharePoint CVEs and More!
Hi,
In R80.20, when you have a tcp server accessed by tcp port 8082, it is dropped by CP implied rule 0.
TCP 8081,8083 … works, but 8082 not.
The SYN packet cannot be seen after Inbound VM chain. Anybody have an idea?
Hi Cihat,
Are you able to share the Log entry relevant to the drop please?
Regards
Mark
Unfortunately, there is no log entry. Only "fw ctl zdebug + drop" output. It is dropped by implied rule 0, nothing else.
Within SmartConsole can you screen shot the service you created for 8082 please?
Would I be correct in assuming that you are not logging implied rules?
Regards
Mark
It is normal TCP service, nothing else. Add new service and just type 8082.
Is this by any chance a Cloudguard VM in Azure/AWS?
There are a number of SK's where there is the following line:
The following ports cannot be used: 444, 8082 and 8880.
I could not find why but it seems these ports have an internal use there.
I know it, but my system is appliance. You can test it on any appliance or in vm.
It may be worth getting a TAC case raised to investigate further. Have you had a look at the implied rules to see if the traffic matches anyone of those? If I get time this evening, I'll have a further look for you.
Regards
Mark
I had a quick check and I cannot see any implied rules that would cause your traffic to be blocked.
If you have a hardware appliance with SecureXL on, you could try turning off SecureXL and seeing if you can see anything further within fw monitor. I would recommend just checking your current loading, as if you box is already highly utilized you will want to disable during a maintenance window.
If you don't see anything further with SecureXL disabled, then I would suggest raising a TAC case.
Regards
Mark
The exact scenario is;
GW External IP:8082 -> Static NAT -> Server internal IP:8082
I have tested in two different environment, one is fresh appliance and the other is in vm.
I belive those ports are used internally (specifically for MultiPortal).
As such they cannot be used in this context and a different port should be used.
You can use any port, but please document it. Because my customer spent 5 hours to discover this issue. At the end, replaced the port.
Leaderboard
Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.
User | Count |
---|---|
12 | |
11 | |
8 | |
7 | |
7 | |
7 | |
6 | |
6 | |
5 | |
5 |
Thu 25 Sep 2025 @ 03:00 PM (IDT)
NIS2 Compliance in 2025: Tactical Tools to Assess, Secure, and ComplyThu 25 Sep 2025 @ 03:00 PM (IDT)
NIS2 Compliance in 2025: Tactical Tools to Assess, Secure, and ComplyThu 09 Oct 2025 @ 10:00 AM (CEST)
CheckMates Live BeLux: Discover How to Stop Data Leaks in GenAI Tools: Live Demo You Can’t Miss!Wed 22 Oct 2025 @ 11:00 AM (EDT)
Firewall Uptime, Reimagined: How AIOps Simplifies Operations and Prevents OutagesAbout CheckMates
Learn Check Point
Advanced Learning
YOU DESERVE THE BEST SECURITY