topic Re: Teamviewer and Commit warning in General Topics

Teamviewer and Commit warning

aaobuhov — Sun, 09 Dec 2018 19:39:15 GMT

We have to allow only Teamviewer on some pc's, not internet browsing.

I created rule with apps:
teamviewer (apps-group)
teamviewer-web
adobe-flash-socketpolicy-server, ssl, web-browsing

But this rule will allow web-access to all sites.

Ok, i created custom URL category profile "Only teamviewer":
teamviewer.com
*.teamviewer.com

But traffic is not hit this rule, because "teamviewer-base" returns "any" it category:
https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000Cm08CAC
"For team viewer, as it has its own decoder, it is not considered to be a web-browsing app anymore.

PAN only do the URL-Filtering in http decode for sure but it is not always for specific application decode."

Ok, i split rule:
Rule 1. teamviewer (apps-group)
teamviewer-web
adobe-flash-socketpolicy-server

Rule 2. ssl, web-browsing with URL category profile "Only teamviewer"

Rule 3. deny any

So i receive Warning while commit:
in 1st rule i use teamviewer-base and teamviewer-web, they need ssl and web-browsing, but ssl an web are denied in Rule 3

How to limit some pc without Palo Alto commit warning?

Re: Teamviewer and Commit warning

BPry — Mon, 10 Dec 2018 03:57:18 GMT

The validation process works by verifying each security rulebase entry. This process does not take into account other entries in the security rulebase, and the validation warning will trigger if any one policy does not include all applications required for the policy to function.

This is expected behavior, and as of yet, you are unable to suppress these commit warning messages.

Re: Teamviewer and Commit warning

aaobuhov — Mon, 10 Dec 2018 05:45:54 GMT

Thank you, BPry

Is it possible to somehow change the sequence of rules so that there are no warnings?

Re: Teamviewer and Commit warning

BPry — Tue, 11 Dec 2018 18:35:24 GMT

@aaobuhov,

Nope. No matter what you do, the validation process will only look at the rulebase by an entry by entry basis. So rule order doesn't matter here.