<?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 Adding app depencendies in General Topics</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229109#M65872</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;This might be a dumb question, but I visited 3 clients in the past 2 weeks that did not include application depenendcies in their policy rules&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For example, they'll have a rule allowing webex-base, but don't add rtcp, rtp-base, or stun.&amp;nbsp; To be fair, at least 1 of them had a rule that contains an application filter that allows risks 1, 2&amp;nbsp;and 3, so in that regards, they are allowing the applications.&amp;nbsp; When apply a policy, you'll still get the long list of warnings and that's annoying to me. I guess I'm picky &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;How do you all handle it&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2018 19:41:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ce1028</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-09-01T19:41:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Adding app depencendies</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229109#M65872</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This might be a dumb question, but I visited 3 clients in the past 2 weeks that did not include application depenendcies in their policy rules&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For example, they'll have a rule allowing webex-base, but don't add rtcp, rtp-base, or stun.&amp;nbsp; To be fair, at least 1 of them had a rule that contains an application filter that allows risks 1, 2&amp;nbsp;and 3, so in that regards, they are allowing the applications.&amp;nbsp; When apply a policy, you'll still get the long list of warnings and that's annoying to me. I guess I'm picky &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;How do you all handle it&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2018 19:41:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229109#M65872</guid>
      <dc:creator>ce1028</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-09-01T19:41:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Adding app depencendies</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229123#M65874</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/71649"&gt;@ce1028&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ya this one gets kind of annoying because there really isn't a good way to fix it. There's an existing Feature Request to allow the ability to supress these warnings, but at the moment it hasn't been implemented at all.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That being said, depending on the configuration this really may not be an issue. Say for example they have rules that already allow [ rtcp rtp-base stun ] further along the rulebase, and then a seperate rule for simply webex-base. You'll still get the warnings, but due to the way the firewall actually works when scanning sessions it won't cause any issues at all.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've always viewed the warnings as more of a "hey, this might not work the best as configured unless you've already allowed the following".&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2018 23:33:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229123#M65874</guid>
      <dc:creator>BPry</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-09-01T23:33:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Adding app depencendies</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229124#M65875</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/43480"&gt;@BPry&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;hmmm that would be nice feature. Although if rule1 had [rtcp rtp-base stun] and rule 2 had [web-browsing,ssl,webex-base], the firewall should probably be smart enough to realize you have all you need and not give the warning.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Sep 2018 00:33:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/general-topics/adding-app-depencendies/m-p/229124#M65875</guid>
      <dc:creator>ce1028</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-09-02T00:33:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

