About Joshan_Lakhani

@Sonu_Singh  thanks for you reply   As iam not  seen any thing in  ms.log   020-08-25 08:56:05.679 +0300 No new WildFire updates available for download 2020-08-25 08:57:01.148 +0300 pan_dynupdsch_local_refresh(pan_cfg_dynupdsch.c:2054): scheduled-update: "_SystemWildfireUpdate_" refreshing of WildFire 'cfg.platform.express-mode': NO_MATCHES NO_MATCHES NO_MATCHES 2020-08-25 08:57:05.328 +0300 No new WildFire updates available for download 2020-08-25 08:57:41.884 +0300 ##### Non-BATCH report found (acc-summary) 2020-08-25 08:57:41.885 +0300 report generation started for 'acc-summary' 2020-08-25 08:57:41.885 +0300 ** generating report for time from 1598331461 to 1598335060 2020-08-25 08:57:41.915 +0300 ##### Non-BATCH report found (acc-summary) 2020-08-25 08:57:41.979 +0300 client dagger reported op command was SUCCESSFUL 2020-08-25 08:57:42.237 +0300 report generation started for 'acc-summary' 2020-08-25 08:57:42.237 +0300 ** generating report for time from 1598331461 to 1598335060 2020-08-25 08:57:42.273 +0300 client dagger reported op command was SUCCESSFUL 2020-08-25 08:57:42.685 +0300 ##### Non-BATCH report found (custom-dynamic-report) 2020-08-25 08:57:42.687 +0300 report generation started for 'custom-dynamic-report' 2020-08-25 08:57:42.689 +0300 ** generating report for time from 1598331462 to 1598335061 2020-08-25 08:57:42.853 +0300 client dagger reported op command was SUCCESSFUL ... View more

@OtakarKlier  Paloalto verdict are malware  and allow the traffic but from paloalto there is fortimail which is  behind the paloalto and they reject these file.     ... View more

@OtakarKlier thanks for your reply   As we same file with same hashes are blocked.But  after some  hours same file with same hashes are allowed by paloalto. Please suggest PAN-OS version 9.0.5         ... View more

There are certain files which were sent to wildfire for multiple times and every time we have received verdict as malicious. The same file (i have verified the file hash available in wildfire cloud) is submitting multiple times even after the verdict is malicious from old wildfire submission. is it behaviour of paloalto please suggest. Moreover my PAN-OS version is 9.0.5 ... View more

@BPry thanks for you reply   As we have seen in 9.1.4 know issue there is not mention any bug id moreover i have also check in my lab it's working in 9.0 but in 9.1 we cannot filter through serial number. if you have internal bug report can you please send me bug report. I don't have any bug id. ... View more

@BPry    Can you please send me any bug id or request id from TAC support    ... View more

@Houran    Call EDL ip information apply  in security policy and commit and then check hope it'will help you.   https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA10g000000ClRvCAK   ... View more

@BPry  thanks for your reply   As is there any bug id or request id. As other filter are working fine except then serial number eq filter is not working  ... View more

@vsys_remo  @OtakarKlier Thanks for you reply   As the issue is when user send his request to DNS. palolalto resolve one one DNS query rather than i will contact with other DNS traffic also. Some can we pervent for multiple DNS response  for single query. ... View more

@OtakarKlier  Just a little correction here: No, we do not want single IP in response of a domain resolution – a single response can have multiple IP addresses. What we want to achieve is, whenever a client requests DNS server for a DNS query Palo Alto should ensure it gets a single response. We basically want to prevent DDOS attacks that are initiated using DNS responses. ... View more

@OtakarKlier thanks for you reply   As we observed some time users are access yahoo.com instead of this user will also get other response too like shopping site, advertising page etc.. so can we prevent the user to access only  yahoo.com rather then add some other DNS query resolution . Please suggest ... View more

@MP18 @vsys_remo    Today i took the PCAP and does not find any drop on Firewall.  But i open FW file i can see this can you please suggest me        ... View more

@MP18    As i  have  disable the all the other weak cipher only one cipher suite cbc-256 is when i disable this error is Kindly suggest ... View more

@MP18    I didnt configure the log forwarding , it is showing alerts in systems Any issue if i ignore this or i need to take some action. Please suggest. ... View more

@MP18  Thanks for you reply As we are not using the URL Filtering and in the session id  Traffic is "TCP-FIN"   ... View more

@vsys_remo  I have create the policy any but the issue still same ... View more

@vsys_remo Thanks for your reply I want to configure like this in cisco dns-guard Like that firewall will allow only one response for one dns request packet. So Can we configure this in our palo alto firewall. ... View more

I want to configure like this in cisco dns-guard Like that firewall will allow only one response for one dns request packet. So Can we configure this in our palo alto firewall. ... View more

@vsys_remo  No only the issue is with  Twitter all the other social networking site are allow and it's working fine ... View more

@vsys_remo thanks for you reply   Is internetaccess in general working? Yes internet is working fine once we bypass the paloalto and connect directly laptop with ISP router it's working fine once  i connect laptop behind the palolalto i go this error. How does the security policy look like Create test policy the security policy source “any” destination “any” destination ip address 10.x.x.x Application any and remove security profiles and action “allow” and put on TOP Do you have dropped connections in the log? In traffic log Session reason "TCP Fin " Is TLS decryption enabled and working properly? No decryption is enable    Addition Information: i have also create the application override but issue still same I have delete the browse cookies but issue still not response. Please suggest ... View more

As I disable all other weak  cipher suite but the when i disable CBC-256 i got the error. As i use TLS1.2  3rd party certificate.Please suggest ... View more