<?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: User-ID on incoming connections in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35893#M26380</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hopefully you have your clients segmented away from the servers which gives that adding only the clientip ranges should be enough (and most optimized).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For clients from for example Internet I assume you use some kind of VPN and this will have internal ip's that your internal firewall will see.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I imagine that if you add 0.0.0.0/0 as ip range the user-id agent will try to resolve connections it doesnt have to, like connection from another server.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But sure - if the process running on the source server is using a specific account you could use userid to limit not only on zone, ip, service (port) and appid but also userid. But I dont know how user-id agent is compatible with such approach (since on the server there is normally noone logged in on the console and each process runs with their own user).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:34:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mikand</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-03-08T06:34:06Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>User-ID on incoming connections</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35892#M26379</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;So, we are currently using the user-id agent to monitor our CAS exchange servers. This is working great for identifiying our internal users hitting exchange from the inside. However I would like to begin identifying users that are accessing the CAS servers from the outside. I have tested this with a single IP address range added to the user-ID agent on our DC's to verify that it is indeed possible. This was also successfull. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The question I have is - Can one (or should one) include all IP addresses into the User-ID agent? Will this be too much overhead for the User-ID agent and or PA to handle? Is the IP include/exclude match occur before or after an appropriate event is found within the event stream? What will happen to the WMI probing process?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 02:39:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35892#M26379</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrutalDismount</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-03-08T02:39:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: User-ID on incoming connections</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35893#M26380</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hopefully you have your clients segmented away from the servers which gives that adding only the clientip ranges should be enough (and most optimized).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For clients from for example Internet I assume you use some kind of VPN and this will have internal ip's that your internal firewall will see.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I imagine that if you add 0.0.0.0/0 as ip range the user-id agent will try to resolve connections it doesnt have to, like connection from another server.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But sure - if the process running on the source server is using a specific account you could use userid to limit not only on zone, ip, service (port) and appid but also userid. But I dont know how user-id agent is compatible with such approach (since on the server there is normally noone logged in on the console and each process runs with their own user).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:34:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35893#M26380</guid>
      <dc:creator>mikand</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-03-08T06:34:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: User-ID on incoming connections</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35894#M26381</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P class="MsoPlainText"&gt;I think the User-ID Agent must process every relevant event in the security log regardless of your include/exclude list.&lt;SPAN style="mso-spacerun:yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;The include/exclude list is simply a control mechanism for what addressing the agent ultimately provides user mapping for.&lt;SPAN style="mso-spacerun:yes"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;I think including all addressing will have negligible effect on performance.&lt;SPAN style="mso-spacerun:yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoPlainText"&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoPlainText"&gt;I wouldn't want the agent to do a WMI probe of an external client.&lt;SPAN style="mso-spacerun:yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;For external users it might be better to run a separate agent with all the probing options turned off... exclude all private addressing and include 0.0.0.0/0.&lt;SPAN style="mso-spacerun:yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoPlainText"&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P class="MsoPlainText"&gt;Jeff&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:24:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35894#M26381</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jeff_K</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-03-08T15:24:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: User-ID on incoming connections</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35895#M26382</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;What we are trying to accomplish is to correlate a user with a file block/data filter rules that we have on connections coming from the internet into our DMZ OWA server. Right now it is a manual process; We see a data filter get triggered, then we have to get the source public IP and dig into the OWA IIS logs to see what AD user logged in from that IP. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I will probaly increase the included IP ranges slowly to see how the user-agent reacts. It already takes up a healthy amount of memory.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:53:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/user-id-on-incoming-connections/m-p/35895#M26382</guid>
      <dc:creator>BrutalDismount</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-03-08T16:53:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

