RE: [FW1] Firewall-1 sync problems

2001-05-05 Thread Frank Darden
You don't need to specify the LICENSED interface.. This is incorrect. Use the interface that you want the sync to happen on. Make sure you specify BOTH interfaces in your putkey command eg: fw putkey my.local.ip.interface remote.firewall.interface  and do this on both firewalls.  

Re: [FW1] Auth with RADIUS is not working

2001-05-05 Thread Aylton Souza, CISSP
Just for curiosity: Does you shared secret contain one of the following chars: !@#$%^&*()_+-={}[]\|`~ ? - Original Message - From: "Hans-Joachim Hoetger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "fw-1 Mailinglist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:23 AM Subject: [FW1] Auth with RADIUS

RE: [FW1] Should the use of 'any' be avoided where possible?

2001-05-05 Thread Stafford, Todd
Carl, Another reason why it's dangerous to allow ICMP to all of your hosts is because it allows for the use of a ping sweep to determine the addresses of devices behind your firewall. Once that has been determined, a hacker can then begin banging away looking for additional weaknesses. Noel T.

RE: [FW1] Problem with Websense & Checkpoint

2001-05-05 Thread Hubbard, Dan
Title: RE: [FW1] Problem with Websense & Checkpoint Yes we have seen this. In most cases it is the HTTP security server that is causing the Firewall to slow down. Do you see the in.ahttpd deamon taking lots of CPU resources on your Firewall ? If so, then the sec. server is most likely the issu

Re: [FW1] whether there is a VPN module is include in our checkpoint?

2001-05-05 Thread Aylton Souza, CISSP
Just remember: Beside the fact that your installation supports VPN (because its build - DES + STRONG) you need the license for that. ;-) Best wishes Aylton - Original Message - From: "Matthias Leu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sim, CT (Chee Tong)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[FW1] active log on Alcatel omniswitch

2001-05-05 Thread Maertens Jochen (JMRT)
Hi there, We've got 3 embedded firewalls running on Alcatel omniswitches. We use a NT 4.0 SP6a with fw 4.1 for enterprise management. Everything works except the active log which remains empty. Any ideas guys or girls ? Jochen =

RE: [FW1] FW-1 Intrusion Detection.

2001-05-05 Thread Zeltser, Roman
RE: [FW1] NT Domain Regsitration through FIrewall-1 http://www.rtek2000.com/Tech/InternetSecureLinks.html#ids   = Best, Roman M. Zeltser RS Information Systems, Inc. 410-966-6192 NCC, DNE *** Securing your retirement money from ha

RE: [FW1] Logging FW-1 Policy Editor Changes

2001-05-05 Thread Zeltser, Roman
Look here for a list of the tools: http://www.rtek2000.com/Tech/InternetSecureLinks.html#report The index list contains the links that are related to multiple issues we meet every day (Intrusion Detection, protocols, reporting, viruses, performance, filters, certifications, hacking, tools, , HA/

Re: [FW1] how to know we are at unlimited user license?

2001-05-05 Thread Aylton Souza, CISSP
fw printlic shows the current licenses installed in you system - Original Message - From: "David Gollop" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 3:53 AM Subject: [FW1] how to know we are at unlimited user license? > > > how to know we are at unlimited user

Re: [FW1] Problem with Websense & Checkpoint

2001-05-05 Thread Network Security
Larry Milliken, USLEC wrote: > Currently having a problem with Websense v3.1 & Checkpoint Fw4.1/SP2 > The Websense is on a NT4 box, the FW4.1 is on Solaris (Both OS with latest > patches/ServicePacks) > > Over a period of a couple of days I begin to lose resources on the Unix box > to the point

RE: [FW1] 2 FW interfaces on same network for redundancy?

2001-05-05 Thread Juppunov, George
You'll need to set up a trunk. I'm not sure if you can trunk any number of interfaces, but you can research that. There are some conventions and guidelines regarding setting up trunks on Solaris that you can get from sun.com. Also, you network people will need to setup a channel on the switches

[FW1] Encryption types on VPN tab.

2001-05-05 Thread Dave Dunaway (ncc0296)
Hey folks, I was about to setup a VPN on a new firewall I just built when I noticed tha the VPN tab shows no available encryption schemes. I press 'edit' and it justs sits there. The firewalls are nokia boxes. I nedd to add ISAKMP/Oakley...how do I add it? Thanks. -- Dave Dunaway [[EMAIL

[FW1] in.asmtpd does not work

2001-05-05 Thread Naresh
Hi, I am trying to set up smtp security server on FW1- ver 4.1 build 41813. I have set up SMTP resource and installed policy. When I telnet on port 25, the connection is ESTABLISHED and in.asmtpd starts. I remains in this state however for long time and then times out. I don't see any wel

Re: [FW1] SecuRemote, DHCP and IP POOL

2001-05-05 Thread Aylton Souza, CISSP
Fabio, You CAN have DNS or WINS set to an internal resource. Take a look on the public config. docs at CP's site or Phoneboy. This is called the SR split DNS configuration. It works fine and there's no need to set an internal DHCP since VPN-1 itself will take care of the IP assignment using I

Re: [FW1] Logging FW-1 Policy Editor Changes

2001-05-05 Thread Paul . Simons
CheckPoint FW-NG (version 5?) will do this. http://www.checkpoint.com/products/ng/ngmi.html C. Paul Simons Corporate Network Security Services IHS Energy Group, Englewood, CO. Main: +1 303 736 3000 Dir

RE: [FW1] Automatic NAT Sucks?

2001-05-05 Thread Harjot Sekhon
Hi Paul, I avoid using automatic NAT as they are more trouble than worth. I always use static NAT whenever possible. 2 reasons: - more control - static nat does not get allocated to all policies unlike automatic

[FW1] Real Secure

2001-05-05 Thread Marcello
Hi World. In Real Secure there are any way that I can view the log, as I can see in FW-1. There are a .mdb file with all logs. In the documentation there are a Log Viewer like in FW but I don´t find it. I´m using the trial version 5.0. Regards. Marcello ==

RE: [FW1] Automatic NAT Sucks?

2001-05-05 Thread bfuller
I would say for all new users, it serves it's purpose well. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Murphy Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 6:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] Automatic NAT Sucks? Personally, I don't like the use of a

RE: [FW1] StoneBeat and 3Com Problem

2001-05-05 Thread Juppunov, George
You need to setup a CAM entry in your switches that binds the two firewall ports together. I.e. you need to turn the switch into a hub, as far as these two ports are concerned. On your router, you also want to bind the MAC multicast to the VIP of the complex. Make sure you do that for each inter

RE: [FW1] fw_xlate_forw Error on FW-1

2001-05-05 Thread Alex . Barenbaum
I was only able to find the following article that I thought was close: allocate_port: could not find a free port Unfortunately, this is not the exact issue that we are experiencing. If there's another article that may apply, but I haven't found it, I'd really appreciate it if you would forward

RE: [FW1] Faq?

2001-05-05 Thread Zeltser, Roman
Additionally, http://www.rtek2000.com/Tech/InternetSecureLinks.html#faq The index list contains the links that are related to multiple issues we meet every day (Intrusion Detection, protocols, reporting, viruses, performance, filters, certifications, hacking, tools, , HA/Load Balancing, FW lists

[FW1] secure remote

2001-05-05 Thread Caroline Lario
I am having a problem since I installed secure remote on my laptop running windows ME. I have installed build 4176. I was testing connecting through my network card which goes through a cable modem which I know doesn't always work. When the connection failed I tried to connect to things outside

RE: [FW1] Why should the firewall be the NAT boundery?

2001-05-05 Thread Harjot Sekhon
Hi Paul, Clarification, you are trying to VPN into your internal network via the firewall with SecuRemote. If so, then the firewall needs an offical IP on the external segment. Does the external router perform static NAT or dynamic NAT for the firewall ? What VPN encryption scheme are

[FW1] RE: Check Point certification

2001-05-05 Thread Scott Schindler
This is a long message. Please read it only if certification and training are important to you. As a the manager of multiple Check Point ATCs this line of discussion is near and dear to me. I am hoping that I am speaking for all the CP trainers. I could only be so lucky. All of us in the

Re: [FW1] Strange message after installing FW-1 SP3

2001-05-05 Thread Chris F
Greg, Thanks for the post. I guess I'm CP screwed as when I requested a CP2000 CD, my reseller said "Sorry -- we don't have anymore". What? Software subscription is just a term :( Thanks for sharing with the list :) -- Chris --- Greg Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's a problem wit

[FW1] Harding Sun OS

2001-05-05 Thread Robert N. Correa
Group, First time installing Checkpoint on Solaris 2.8 and had a couple of questions on Harding the OS. I used the "how to strip down Unix" doc which consist of about 60 steps from checkpoint and Sun security patches . I was wondering is there anything I need to do to the kernel before instal

RE: [FW1] 4.1 SP1 version of the GUI client

2001-05-05 Thread Steve Moran
It should be on the same disk that you installed CPFW from. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FW1] 4.1 SP1 version of the GUI client How can I get the 4.1 SP1 version of the GUI

[FW1] Hybrid Mode

2001-05-05 Thread Dany_Grenier
Can you tell me where can I see if the Hybrid Mode is select ? It's supposed to be in the IKE properties but I don't find it! Thank's To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions a

RE: [FW1] Strange message after installing FW-1 SP3

2001-05-05 Thread Chris F
I don't have any problems that are associated with that error -- since any issues I have, I have had them since v.4.0 SPx Do you have CP support where you could ask CP? Thanks -- Chris --- Nils Kolstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah well, I'm glad I'm not the only one.. What are > the sympto

RE: [FW1] Should the use of 'any' be avoided where possible?

2001-05-05 Thread Scott Schindler
Using 'any' is not a problem. However as was stated try to restrict unnecessary traffic. Always restrict access to what is 'truly' necessary. As far as ICMP. Simply create a rule that lets your users use icmp requests and let the Internet get to your network with icmp replies. Yes people