Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 483
  • Last Modified:

snmp monitoring of Checkpoint firewall

I have enabled SNMP on my checkpoint 4400 firewall running R77.10.  

However, I am not sure how to create a rule on the firewall to allow SNMP traffic to flow between my monitoring server (10.1.1.20) and the internal interface of the firewall (10.1.1.16).  I am new to Checkpoints so am a little lost.

SNMP-Rule.PNG
All of the documentation I have found online states that this needs to be done, but provides no instruction on how to do it.

Please help.
0
mtkaiser
Asked:
mtkaiser
  • 5
  • 4
2 Solutions
 
gheistCommented:
You need to allow from IP to IP and only SNMP
0
 
FideliusCommented:
Your rule is OK. If you set up SNMP correctly, it should work.
You can clean up rule a little bit and leave only snmp and snmp-trap.

If you want more strict rule make it like this:
CP monitoring rule
And put the rule as high as possible, as it will be hit pretty often.
0
 
gheistCommented:
No - snmp requests come from SNMP server and checkpoint keeps state to get responses back to SNMP server.
Then check logs (from one host to other host, looking for smart blocking errors, if yes, change rule to IP:any->CP:161 all UDP))

SNMP traps can notify monitoring system (if it includes SNMP trap handling), thats out of scope for first attempt. It will need a new rule in other direction 162/UDP, with same hand-patting to make it work.
0
Managing Security Policy in a Changing Environment

The enterprise network environment is evolving rapidly as companies extend their physical data centers to embrace cloud computing and software-defined networking. This new reality means that the challenge of managing the security policy is much more dynamic and complex.

 
FideliusCommented:
Yes, I agree.
But if you put rule the way I wrote it, you will at the same time allow snmp queries from server to CheckPoint, and CheckPoint sending traps to server.
This rule can be separated in two rules, but if you put it like this, it is more clearer and easier to manage.
0
 
gheistCommented:
But why to let unused protocols through?
0
 
FideliusCommented:
As I said, it is more clearer and easier to manage. Also it takes less resources on firewall upon compiling rules
If you want strict and very high level of security you can write two separate rules
- one allowing server to CP only at udp/161
- other allowing CP to server only for udp/162

At the end it is balance between security and manageability.
0
 
gheistCommented:
In other words sacrificing of security on altar of laziness ;)
0
 
FideliusCommented:
It depends :)
Sometimes going to more restricted policies on inside network leads to more problems, especially if you have lots of rules, and lots of systems to manage. But this is totally different subject from one in question ;)
0
 
gheistCommented:
My point is to check for conflicts with inspection engine at the very beginning to keep it running problem-free after.
0
 
mtkaiserAuthor Commented:
Thanks guys!!
0

Featured Post

What does it mean to be "Always On"?

Is your cloud always on? With an Always On cloud you won't have to worry about downtime for maintenance or software application code updates, ensuring that your bottom line isn't affected.

  • 5
  • 4
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now