We have a web server in fron of a PAN that accesses MS-SQL behind the PAN.
In the vulnerability profile that we're using, everything (client/server) is set to "default".
I appreciate it's a fairly broad question, but is this enough?
It seems your deployment scenario is following
SQL server <======> Palo Alto Networks Firewall <=========> Web Server <==......
In above scenario, the firewall would see only SQL traffic between the web server and SQL server and as such we will protect against the vulnerabilities in SQL traffic only and take whatever action was configured by default for such signatures (since you are using default configuration). If, however, you are interested in protecting against SQL "injection" traffic which is essentially "malicious" SQL embedded in the HTTP requests, then the firewall would need to be deployed on the other side of the web server so that the firewall can see HTTP traffic.
Let me know if you have any further questions,
Thanks Sandeep, that more or less how I saw it, I just wasn't sure if SQL injection is strictly a SQL or a http issue so far as IPS vendors are concerned (as SQL is merely doing what it's told, the issue is how it gets to be told).
Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.
The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!
These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the Live Community as a whole!
The Live Community thanks you for your participation!