License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

Reply
Highlighted
L0 Member

License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

We have a client that requires GlobalProtect for connecting to their network. Their site provides the installers which is version 3.1.1.27. We have an internal team that insists on receiving a license description or EULA for using the client binaries. They cannot believe that there is such a thing as a software client that doesnt show or store a EULA for the user to agree. I dont have access to the server software although I have already logged a request for the GlobalProtect system administrators to confirm that using the Portal client does not require a licence.

 

The closest I can see are the following:

 

Are there any literature that officially discuses the license restrictions (or lack of) on the  Portal client? Thanks.

 


Accepted Solutions
Highlighted
Cyber Elite

Re: License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

@ramfree17,

The agent really isn't anything that Palo Alto is worried about, and I don't believe there actually is any license to give for it. Essentially Palo Alto doesn't care about the agent, they care about the device you are connecting to and it's license compliance. 

View solution in original post


All Replies
Highlighted
L5 Sessionator

Re: License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

Hi,

 

With the link you provide, you have all info no ??

 

Rgds

 

V.

Highlighted
Cyber Elite

Re: License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

@ramfree17,

The agent really isn't anything that Palo Alto is worried about, and I don't believe there actually is any license to give for it. Essentially Palo Alto doesn't care about the agent, they care about the device you are connecting to and it's license compliance. 

View solution in original post

Highlighted
L0 Member

Re: License/Eula for GlobalProtect Portal client v3.x

@VinceM: Not really. None of them talks about the client. The reviewers are not accepting the argumetn that the lack of reference is evidence of the lack of licensing terms. I wish it does since I spent more time trying to prove it doesnt exist than just creating a dummy BSD-type EULA. They wont know the difference anyway. :(

Like what you see?

Show your appreciation!

Click Like if a post is helpful to you or if you just want to show your support.

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!