<?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: Consequences of replacing CBC encryption with GCM on IPSec and IKE profiles in Next-Generation Firewall Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/consequences-of-replacing-cbc-encryption-with-gcm-on-ipsec-and/m-p/1236870#M6245</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Except for a little outage the moment you make the change on both sides, nothing would really change.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'd double check to make sure each (IKE + IPSec) profile is only used by the intended ike gateway/ipsec tunnel. If you're using the same profile for all your gateways and tunnels, start by creating a fresh one and assigning that to the gateways/tunnels you intend to switch over so you can take it step by step. in some cases the transition may be a little less smoothly if the remote end is a different vendor.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;remember to set authentication in the IKE profile to 'non-auth'&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:26:54 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-08-28T13:26:54Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Consequences of replacing CBC encryption with GCM on IPSec and IKE profiles</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/consequences-of-replacing-cbc-encryption-with-gcm-on-ipsec-and/m-p/1236780#M6242</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am looking to replace all existing CBC encryption with GCM within IPSec/ IKE crypto but need to be certain that functionality will remain.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What if any impact would this have on the existing profiles if changed?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Unfortunately could not find a definitive answer on the forums/ elsewhere. Many thanks.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:23:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/consequences-of-replacing-cbc-encryption-with-gcm-on-ipsec-and/m-p/1236780#M6242</guid>
      <dc:creator>J.Smith575107</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-08-27T08:23:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Consequences of replacing CBC encryption with GCM on IPSec and IKE profiles</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/consequences-of-replacing-cbc-encryption-with-gcm-on-ipsec-and/m-p/1236870#M6245</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Except for a little outage the moment you make the change on both sides, nothing would really change.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'd double check to make sure each (IKE + IPSec) profile is only used by the intended ike gateway/ipsec tunnel. If you're using the same profile for all your gateways and tunnels, start by creating a fresh one and assigning that to the gateways/tunnels you intend to switch over so you can take it step by step. in some cases the transition may be a little less smoothly if the remote end is a different vendor.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;remember to set authentication in the IKE profile to 'non-auth'&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 13:26:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/next-generation-firewall/consequences-of-replacing-cbc-encryption-with-gcm-on-ipsec-and/m-p/1236870#M6245</guid>
      <dc:creator>reaper</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-08-28T13:26:54Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

