Solved

PCI Compliance Certification and FortiManager

Posted on 2014-11-20
1
188 Views
Last Modified: 2015-02-05
My company is in the final stages of acquiring a PCI Compliance certification.  We're one scanned tested away from obtaining this however the scans that are failing has traffic being directed to a FortiManager appliance.  The appliance is a VM, running on a Gen8 HP BL460 blade server with ESXi 5.0 as the Hypervisor.  Per Fortinet, the ports that are required to run are 22, 443, 6022, 6023, 53, 123, 514, 541, and 161.  Initially we had a full PAT from our external IP address to the internal IP address and so the vulnerability scan was picking up other vulnerabilities.  I setup firewall objects for each port and rewrote the policy to pass traffic on those ports only.  The scan comes back and and says that we're still failing on 22 and 443, which are secure, right?  Our FortiManager appliance is running at 5.0.6 currently.  There ARE newer versions of firmware which I'm not going to ignore as an option, but I want to be certain this is going to resolve my issue before spending the time to update the appliance.  Fortinet's technical support hasn't been much help, ironically, although I suspect the issue their is a matter of customer service, not intelligence.

Has anyone had to deal with PCI compliance and Fortinet Appliances?  Can someone tell me that fix for this is just to upgrade the appliance's firmware?  Any help would be appreciated.
0
Comment
Question by:Josef Al-Chacar
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
1 Comment
 
LVL 63

Accepted Solution

by:
btan earned 500 total points
ID: 40457181
You need to see the error in specific to 22 and 443. The port does not mean secure and compliant, my take on possible area
a) clear traffic still go through like any other port though it should be implementing proper key exchange and encryption or even the expected protocol services
b) use of weak crypto cipher in 22 and 443
c) unpatched or vulnerable services in 22 and 443
d) trigger signature of exploits existence or matched in scanner db
e) false positive
0

Featured Post

Threat Trends for MSPs to Watch

See the findings.
Despite its humble beginnings, phishing has come a long way since those first crudely constructed emails. Today, phishing sites can appear and disappear in the length of a coffee break, and it takes more than a little know-how to keep your clients secure.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

If you thought ransomware was bad, think again! Doxware has the potential to be even more damaging.
This story has been written with permission from the scammed victim, a valued client of mine – identity protected by request.

738 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question