<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Clarification on Application and Service in security policy in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556022#M1789</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/313004"&gt;@IBM-MSS&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yes, and also not really ... but also yes ... but primarily no&amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":grinning_face:"&gt;😀&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What happens in that situation is that the firewall needs to allow enough traffic to pass to actually identify the application, so your rule will capture a whole lot more traffic than your actual intent. That being said, as soon as the firewall can identify the application and it&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;isn't&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;what you have specified the traffic will no longer match the rule and continue to be analyzed according to the rest of your security rulebase.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'd generally recommend being heavily cautious when you're creating these sort of policies, and make them as restrictive as reasonably possible. You&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;are&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;allowing traffic to pass to identify the actual application, there's no way around that when creating a policy like this.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 15:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>BPry</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-08-31T15:06:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Clarification on Application and Service in security policy</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556021#M1788</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;By restricting the security policy with specific application and allow ANY service leads to allow all traffic through that policy?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556021#M1788</guid>
      <dc:creator>IBM-MSS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-08-31T14:59:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Clarification on Application and Service in security policy</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556022#M1789</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/313004"&gt;@IBM-MSS&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yes, and also not really ... but also yes ... but primarily no&amp;nbsp;&lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":grinning_face:"&gt;😀&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What happens in that situation is that the firewall needs to allow enough traffic to pass to actually identify the application, so your rule will capture a whole lot more traffic than your actual intent. That being said, as soon as the firewall can identify the application and it&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;isn't&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;what you have specified the traffic will no longer match the rule and continue to be analyzed according to the rest of your security rulebase.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'd generally recommend being heavily cautious when you're creating these sort of policies, and make them as restrictive as reasonably possible. You&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;are&amp;nbsp;&lt;/STRONG&gt;allowing traffic to pass to identify the actual application, there's no way around that when creating a policy like this.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 15:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556022#M1789</guid>
      <dc:creator>BPry</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-08-31T15:06:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Clarification on Application and Service in security policy</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556029#M1790</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the clarification.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;During my investigation, i identified that telnet and netmap traffic is allowing through this policy. I believe this is because service will check on Layer 3 and Application will check on layer 7.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 16:14:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556029#M1790</guid>
      <dc:creator>IBM-MSS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-08-31T16:14:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Clarification on Application and Service in security policy</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556032#M1791</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If you test connectivity with telnet then firewall sees TCP 3way handshake and as there is no application traffic yet it will be permitted.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You could set up some dummy rule to collect those incompletes and this avoids your app rule to match other traffic.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This example works well for that purpose as ping is not actually TCP application and it never matches to outgoing pings &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Raido_Rattameister_0-1693499084673.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/53326i2D080A016F453035/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Raido_Rattameister_0-1693499084673.png" alt="Raido_Rattameister_0-1693499084673.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 16:25:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/clarification-on-application-and-service-in-security-policy/m-p/556032#M1791</guid>
      <dc:creator>Raido_Rattameister</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-08-31T16:25:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

