CPUG: The Check Point User Group

Resources for the Check Point Community, by the Check Point Community.


First, I hope you're all well and staying safe.
Second, I want to give a "heads up" that you should see more activity here shortly, and maybe a few cosmetic changes.
I'll post more details to the "Announcements" forum soon, so be on the lookout. -E

 

Search:

Type: Posts; User: urilewi

Search: Search took 0.00 seconds.

  1. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    I see what you're saying however, SAMP is not intended for this purpose, it is only for immediate response it would be really ineffective to mange dozens of thousands of rules like this, and it will...
  2. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    I'm not sure what you mean by entries
    For rules, I would think that since these rules are eventually rule-based adding 60k/70k rules would be really ineffective, I don't know the number of rules...
  3. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    Hi blason

    Took a little longer then I expected
    This definitely works

    The quota rules are not immediately applied to the Security Gateway. They are only registered in the Suspicious Activity...
  4. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    Should have an answer for you later today
  5. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    Yes, I'm CP staff

    Can you please post the SAMP command you used.
    As I mentioned before it should work as I would expect it to be the same as rulebase enforcement on a GW configured in bridge...
  6. Replies
    13
    Views
    1,665

    Re: fw samp in Bridge mode not working

    Hi blason

    Logically this should work, as even though this is treated as Layer 2 the frames going through the bridge still contain the IP header and thus SAMP could be used to block specific...
  7. Re: Upgrade from R77.30 JHFA 216 to R80.10 not working

    You are right - CPUSE can be considered in-place upgrade.

    I was referring to the previous method mentioned in the thread (via command line with mounted iso)

    Clean install in this sense would be...
  8. Re: Upgrade from R77.30 JHFA 216 to R80.10 not working

    Here's what the RN says - in-place upgrade is not supported:
    1313
  9. Replies
    10
    Views
    2,873

    Re: What's the point of providing SK feedback?

    Hi

    While you are absolutely right about this, I'm pretty sure this was a mistake as promptly responding to customer feedback via SKs is one of the Knowledge Center team highest priorities. I can...
  10. Replies
    17
    Views
    3,969

    Re: SecureXL randomly turned off

    Hi

    Indeed this is related to the templates mechanism as some noticed over here, this mechanism is relatively new and caused by a race condition when multiple instances are involved.

    You can...
  11. Replies
    2
    Views
    1,116

    Re: VPN issue in R77.30

    There are some parameters missing for better analysis however I was wandering if you tries using MSS clamping?
    ...
  12. Re: Site-2-site vpn between Checkpoint R75.47/R77.30 and Cisco IOS router

    This is definitely related to the fact that its a VPN with inter-operable device, upon policy push the IKE_SAs (ISAKAMP) are deleted and renegotiated.
    You can overcome this with R77.30 version by...
  13. Replies
    5
    Views
    3,256

    Re: Checkpoint R61 - Windows iso

    Hi Knata

    I can't response to private messages till I post at least 10 times ???! and I do not have your personal email address so:

    OK, upload is in process, I'm uploading 3 files:
    1 - R61.zip...
  14. Replies
    5
    Views
    3,256

    Re: Checkpoint R61 - Windows iso

    If this is still valid I might be able to provide it to you
    Can you specify an FTP server I can upload this to?
Results 1 to 14 of 14