In simple words, technically it is not possible to translate traffics sent on multiple ports to a single port on a NAT policy. Port forwarding from multiple ports to a single port now works; however, I am now unable to make any changes to the NAT rule without triggering the "Error: Original Source:Unknown service class" error. I have checked the logs and i don't see any events that have been labeled as "attacks". Firewall Settings > Advanced We have a Windows XP computer (don't ask) with network shares that, as of yesterday, are no longer reachable by other computers on the LAN. Please post in here for any clarifications. log into the sonicwall, click firewall, for an outbound connection click LAN >> WAN in the Matrix chart that it shows CLick Add Select the Service (SMPT is port 25) Select the source as any select the desitnation as any and select Discard (not Deny) select OK outbound port port 25 now blocked For whatever reason Trustwave was unable to advise on how to reduce their scan intensity. I simply want to plug my laptop into any unused port and be on the same subnet as the switch! I have two Access and NAT policies set up exactly the same with the only difference being the source IP address. I found a KB link that explains the error. In the Window that comes up, give it a name (Remote1 for example), change the Protocol to TCP (6), and where it says port range, type the single first you want to use as both the beginning and end port number (65501- 65501). Unfortunately TrustWave is the only vendor that our client uses, and SonicWall is the only device they use so I was unable to compare with other vendors. In reply to How to close DNS UDP ports? We usually work with Qualys for PCI and compliance scanning. Adding your scanning vendor's IPs to any kind of firewall rule or whitelist sounds counter-intuitive to me. It would not be possible to set up this many individual port forwards. It helped me launch a career as a programmer / Oracle data analyst. I was thinking DOS too but I don't see any attacks in the log, do you know if DOS-attack logging is on by default on the sonicwall? Well I have a SonicWALL but we don't run IDS so can't comment on whatdeignguy79 issurmising. under Firewall. If what you are saying is indeed true, Sonicwall will not work for ANY customer doing B-B with Walmart. If the SonicWall is providing the security to your network, then you don't want to whitelist the ASV in that device. Please click on Refresh option in the packet monitor page to see the traffic. It's been a few months since I've dealt with this, but I eventually contacted SonicWall support and after hours of them looking at the logs, they inevitably just chalked it up to "Our devices will not work with the TrustWave scan". How would I go about doing this? I drank the koolaid and went full tilt with Sonicwall firewall, (overpriced) Sonicwall Switch and Sonicwall Access Points. I learn so much from the contributors. By default, the SonicWall blocks all Inbound Traffic that isn't part of a connection that originated from an inside device, like the LAN Zone device. Let me check and find out the error reason. The Port Settings feature lets you change the configuration of the ports on the Switch in order to find the best balance of speed and flow control according to your preferences. The WAN to LAN access rule can be of single that contains all ports using a service group. NAT policy from WAN IP mapped to internal IP with the same service group in the access rule. But I still say a vulnerability scanning provider shouldn't be asking you to make special provision for the scan. Please create two separate service objects with the same TCP port and directly use those service objects in the translated service field on the NAT policies. Mousing over the question mark icon next to the Connections Both have a service groups containing a single port; which, is the same as the listener port on the internal server. We are having a 3rd party do a security assessment, and they are running into the same issue with our Sonicwall TZ-200. 1996-2022 Experts Exchange, LLC. I started with Experts Exchange in 2004 and it's been a mainstay of my professional computing life since. I have a similar issue going on that I haven't been able to resolve. Can't understand why they want you to place an IP in the whitelist for a scan of your WAN interface. page includes the following firewall configuration option groups: To illustrate how this feature works, consider the following example of an FTP server Hi John, "strongswan" service is responsible for establishing IPsec-based VPN connections. The bug was the firewall responded to tcp connections on an unopen port with the content filter block page. I think the only way is to pass sample traffics on couple of ports and check if the end server responds. Some examples would be SSH (TCP port 22), tftp (UDP port 69), and http (TCP port 80). There is a single listener port open on my side. 3) Network-services Added services: named R!ATAFaxUDP 5060-5080 UDP ports 4) -Network-NAT Policy/Rules (2 entries) Named: No SIP Port Remap WAN-To-LAN & No SIP Port Remap LAN-To-WAN Didn't get an answer yet to my two proposals - did you try them? If a request takes more than one packet. Your daily dose of tech news, in brief. I did confirm when adding additional service objects to a service group that is already used in a NAT policy, the addition is successful. I'm currently having this problem with a Sonicwall E5500. The best method of accomplishing your requirement is to configure multiple NAT policies mapping single original and translated ports. If you're hosting a public website behind that firewall, then ports 80 and/or 443 will be open and you may be running a WAF (Web Application Firewall) to detect and block XSS, SQL Injection, and other web application attacks. Please go to "manage", "objects" in the left pane, and "service objects" if you are in the new Sonicwall port forwarding interface. To create a free MySonicWall account click "Register". We don't even use that feature, and even know it's turned off, the device still shuts down the traffic. Just don't block the IP as a result of these events. Create the address object (in your case two and set them as networks) and place in the WAN zone. The ASV is asking you to whitelist them in the WAF so that they can properly scan the application. You will see two tabs once you click "service objects" Service Objects Service Groups Please create friendly object names. If the check box is selected, any FTP data connection through the security appliance must come from port20 or the connection is dropped. Force inbound and outbound FTP data connections to use default port 20 It has always pass but this month it started failing after I updated to ASA 9.1(5). How to Block SMTP Using a SonicWALL Firewall - YouTube 0:00 / 1:49 How to Block SMTP Using a SonicWALL Firewall 13,856 views Feb 13, 2012 25 Dislike Share Save Firewalls.com 16.1K subscribers. I completely understand your client's requirement of all ports starting from 1024 should be translated to a single port. this will result in passive scanners detecting open ports and services. Hover over to see associated ports. Frustratingly, it seems a Sonicwall Switch refuses to allow any Sonicwall firewall Port Shielding on the port it uses to connect to a Sonicwall firewall. - The Enable FTP Transformations for TCP port (s) in Service Object option allows you to select a Service Object to specify a custom control port for FTP traffic. The table entry for your current configuration is indicated in the table, as shown in the example below. You didn't have to actually replace their firewall I hope. This normally takes the form of adding the IP addresses of this scanning service to the "whitelist" of the product or device. Was there a Microsoft update that caused the issue? I'm considering reverting to my old way of an inexpensive layer 2 switch for Sonicpoints rather than being forced into an inflexible network configuration corner by the Sonicwall switch. What ports could it possibly be seeing as open? EXAMPLE: SSH, http, or tftp) from passing though the firewall. So, if i try to go to. Did you ever get a resolution on this please? page: Drop Source Routed Packets Told me to go to our ISP which makes no sense since 11 out of 16 of our locations passed. This time it came back with: "Excessive number of open TCP ports (35712) during port scan.". https://www.sonicwall.com/support/knowledge-base/error-original-source-unknown-service-class-is-displayed-while-creating-a-nat-policy/170503609340809/, https://community.sonicwall.com/technology-and-support/discussion/comment/858#Comment_858. But I don't use the Intrusion Prevention Service (if that's the same thing as the IDS referred to in the thread earlier). We get it - no one likes a content blocker. Frustratingly, it seems a Sonicwall Switch refuses to allow any Sonicwall firewall Port Shielding on the port it uses to connect to a Sonicwall firewall. Please ensure the following network blocks have full, unobstructed, access in order to more accurately perform a vulnerability scan: 204.13.201.0/24, 64.37.231.0/24". Unlimited question asking, solutions, articles and more. For example, if you want to connect to a gaming website, you will need to open specific ports to allow the game server access to your computer through the firewall. I don't think you need or want to make it a trusted network as this would negate the whole premise of a scan. To sign in, use your existing MySonicWall account. For example, if you configure the port to be 76, then you must type <LAN IP Address>:76 into the Web . I was a little shocked to actually hear them admit that, but they tried every setting they could think of and it didn't fix the issue. I found a way around the multiple ports forwarding. It's all good, except I want the unused physical interface ports on the back of the Sonicwall to use the same network subnet (192.168.1.x) as the Sonicwall Switch. Hi, we are having an issue getting a successful scan from our PCI Compliance vendor and unfortunately they aren't being much help. . section of the Firewall I have an NSA 240 and don't have that problem. Kinda of crazy to have to add another subnet for every switch! When the Sonicwall encounters a high intensity scan, it is likely to drop the connections. Dynamic Ports Enable FTP Transformations for TCP port (s) in Service Object - FTP operates on TCP ports 20 and 21 where port 21 is the Control Port and 20 is Data Port. This value is overridden by the UDP Connection timeout you set for individual rules. All rights Reserved. Dynamic Ports To configure advanced access rule options, select, To illustrate how this feature works, consider the following example of an FTP server, The following options are also configured in the, The Connections section provides the ability to fine-tune the performance of the appliance to, DPI Connections (DPI services enabled with additional performance optimization), The maximum number of connections also depends on whether App Flow is enabled and if an. Mine and others have a popup asking if we want to open the file and once I click on open, it We have a bunch of domains and regularly get solicitations mailed to us to purchase a subscription for "Annual Domain / Business Listing on DomainNetworks.com" which promptly land on my desk even though I've thoroughly explained to everyone involved that Webinar: Exploring Societys Comfort with AI-Driven Orchestration, Explore Societys Comfort with AI-Driven Orchestration. Once the necessary packets are captured, click on "Stop Capture". I previously had an issue with the same device failing on the recent OpenSSL vulnerability that was reported, yet SonicWALL claimed the TZ series was not affected. If anyone has resolved this particular issue I'd love to hear about it. Ports are blocked to stop certain types of traffic. Any other settings on the sonicwall I need to configure to get a successful scan? We are having the same issue as the above mentioned Trustwave failed scan "network services has stopped responding" error on an NSA 240. Additionally, if you have an IDS you may want to whitelist them in the IDS to prevent triggering alerts and events.. but personally I consider this a good method of validating the IDS is working correctly. I have a support ticket with Dell/Sonicwall so we will see what becomes of it next week. For the past 22 years, the Port of Los Angeles has been the busiest container port in North America, moving around 10 million cargo containers filled with goods for Americans and . This is by design and applies to all SonicWall Firewall models. This is by design and applies to all SonicWall Firewall models. If so, could you please provide a screenshot of both the NAT policies? are u able to ping any public ip address like ping 4.2.2.2. yes I have no problem pinging or using any port except for 80 and 443, the two ports that are open from the outside to the server. They actually gave us a custom firmware for the device (NSA240) and we applied it last night, but it still fails. Thanks a lot for your efforts in testing it out. ISSUE: I am only able to port forward with one of the NAT rules. the scanner is fooled into thinking that all ports are open. I may have to temporarily in order for them to complete a scan in a timely manner. heading displays a pop-up table of the maximum number of connections for your specific SonicWALL security appliance for the various configuration permutations. I like the idea of managing the Switch and AP's through the Sonicwall firewall, but losing simplicity is frustrating. It detects possible SYN floods and blacklists the ip address, then re-enables after a time out. I could disable https on the outside interface to pass this but that is cheating the system and not the route I want to go beside I would not be able to use any-connect if I disable https. So since we don' have IPS enabled/licensed on our SonicWall, I just added those two IP ranges to the whitelist temporarily in order for them to have access.. It was bizarre. Be aware that ports are 'services' and can be grouped. I know this is an old thread however changes to the Sonicwall firmware affects the default behavior of the classic deny any any model to accept and drop. In addition, it seems adding another Sonicwall Switch to a Sonicwall will require adding yet another subnet (unless daisy chaining switches, which creates a bottleneck). Have them re-run the scan. I've even tried turning off "Prevent All" on the Intrusion Prevention screen. We'll probably wind up trying that though, as we are nearly out of options. I tried disputing the result with Trustwave and opened a support case, neither one yielded a result so I turned off SSL on the WAN interface but left HTTP management open. - Applies firewall rules that is received on a LAN interface and that is destined for the same LAN interface. So the sonicwall sees the scan traffic as a potential DDoS attack and shuts it down. All rights reserved. Managing ports on a firewall is often a common task for those who want to get the most out of their home network. The other returns: "Error: Original Source:Unknown service class". yes, i have a pool and each server has it's own ip. Apply firewall rules for intra-LAN traffic to/from the same interface By white listing them in the SonicWall, it may move the firewall security controls to the software layer such as Windows Firewall or IPTables. The event is then logged as a log event on the security appliance. Anybody found a solution yet? Click add, and repeat these steps for Remote2, 65502-65502. Firewall is going to throw an error message "Error: Original Source:Unknown service class". Covered by US Patent. This is the best money I have ever spent. Typically, this only necessary when secondary LAN subnets are configured. Do we HAVE to have IPS licensed and running on the SonicWall for this to work? I had massive unexplained uploads on the WAN interface, which is how I disovered the issue. I need to forward a port range to a single port. We use Security Metrics and they've never requested this. I haven't seen a way to whitelist that ip address and I'd hate to have to turn off that protection. I think my favorite is #5, blocking the mouse sensor - I also like the idea of adding a little picture or note, and it's short and sweet. Firewall Settings > Advanced sonicwall support tried to tell me the issue was with my modem but after replacing the sonicwall with another router and not having this issue they approved the RMA of the sonicwall, thanks for everyone's help Get an unlimited membership to EE for less than $4 a week. This will prove that your firewall is doing what it is supposed to do and not "breaking down" under pressure. One of our clients has their own Trustwave account. Not exactly the question you had in mind? There doesn't seem to be an option in Trustwave to reduce the intensity of the scan, and the device is dropping their connections. I found a couple issues with port forwarding in Sonicwall which appear to be inconsistencies. Type the number of the desired port in the Port field, and click Accept. The WAN to LAN access rule can be of single that contains all ports using a service group. sonicwall support tried to tell me the issue was with my modem but after replacing the sonicwall with another router and not having this issue they approved the RMA of the sonicwall, thanks for everyone's help. The ASV's responsibility is to validate (by scanning) that proper security controls are in place. Which is great, except that it has increased the time to run a scan from a few hours to 2+ days. This is to safeguard internal devices from harmful access, although it is frequently required to open up specific elements of a network to the outside world, like servers. We have wiped the device and created the rules from scratch, still no go. Identical Sonicwall settings across the board with exception of WAN IP. So I went into our sonicwall and turned off "Enable Stealth Mode" in the Firewall Settings section, and then ran the PCI scan again. When I add a named TCP port in the Translated Service, I receive "Error: Unknown service class" which doesn't make sense to me. It's all good, except I want the unused physical interface ports on the back of the Sonicwall to use the same network subnet (192.168.1.x) as the Sonicwall Switch. however only interesting traffic is passed. Welcome to the Snap! Computers can ping it but cannot connect to it. Well that's awesome! Copyright 2022 SonicWall. Bonus Flashback: Back on December 9, 2006, the first-ever Swedish astronaut launched to We have some documents stored on our SharePoint site and we have 1 user that when she clicks on an Excel file, it automatically downloads to her Downloads folder. The above works fine but I need a rule to forward the range of TCP ports to a single TCP port. To continue this discussion, please ask a new question. This is a vulnerability scan, supposed to represent what anyone could find. With an EE membership, you can ask unlimited troubleshooting, research, or opinion questions. But if I disable the access rules for one of the two it's not effected, i can access external website from it. But wanting to perform any changes to the NAT policy is not allowed and firewall throws same error as explained on previous comments. I also added their IP source addresses to the whitelist in the firewall ACL. Which is ironic, considering it is doing its job. to compy with the audit you may have to change this new default behavior back to deny vs. drop. I share your confusion. Best way is by manually review firewall access rules from WAN zone to any. The illustration below features the older Sonicwall port forwarding interface. This is what I have configured and have working now: Access Rule from WAN to LAN to allow an address group (several IPs) with a service group (range of TCP ports). When I first ran the scan, it came back with the error: "Excessive number of open TCP ports (64146) during port scan.". If I forward the port in the only NAT rule that will allow me (out of 3), I can then add a service object that includes a range of ports (1024 and above) to the service group the NAT is referencing. set IP desired under IP address, set MAC under ethernet address, left lease time at 1440, set gateway & subnet from CMD-ipconfig/all found data. Click "Start Capture". In this case as per my previous suggestion, its not productive and feasible to configure 1000+ NAT policies. What did you wind up doing to get them to pass? When using non-standard ports (for example, 2020, 2121), however, Dell SonicWALL drops the packets by default as it is not able to identify it as FTP traffic. Take one extra minute and find out why we block content. Opening ports on a SonicWALL does not take long if you use its . external collector is configured, as well as the physical capabilities of the particular model of SonicWALL security appliance. yes the sonicwall is accessable and so is another web server behind it. Flashback: Back on December 9, 1906, Computer Pioneer Grace Hopper Born (Read more HERE.) Interesting, a SonicWALL TZ 210 Total Secure is failing for one of my clients on the same "Network Service Stopped Responding" vulnerabilityon a Trustwave scan. Unlimited question asking, solutions, articles and more. The We are having the same issue with Trustwave with our NSA220. - The default configuration allows FTP connections from port 20 but remaps outbound traffic to a port such as 1024. The best method of accomplishing your requirement is to configure multiple NAT policies mapping single original and translated ports. That might give rise to that error. I believe that you can remove their IPs from the whitelist. prioritize either optimal performance or support for an increased number of simultaneous connections that are inspected by UTM services. SonicWall Support Port Settings Use this screen to view and configure Switch port settings. Nothing else ch Z showed me this article today and I thought it was good. If there is no business need and you wish to tighten security further, then you may consider the actions/suggestions highlighted. Sign up for an EE membership and get your own personalized solution. Default UDP Connection Timeout (seconds) The Connections section provides the ability to fine-tune the performance of the appliance to Sonicwalls with the IDS module will often drop "High Intensity" scans, so we use the "Medium Intensity" scan through Qualys and the device passes. Ya that's the funny thing. The following connection options are available: The maximum number of connections also depends on whether App Flow is enabled and if an Please check the link below and let us know if you have any queries or concerns: Please verify if the translated service object in the NAT policy is a service group and not an individual TCP port as you want. If you're hosting a public website behind that firewall, then ports 80 and/or 443 will be open and you may be running a WAF (Web Application Firewall) to detect and block XSS, SQL Injection, and other web application attacks. The has two effects, it shows the port as open to an external scanner (it isnt) and the firewall sends back a thousand times more data in response. But if you absolutely have to. All we have is basic firewall licensed, no other features. Click "OK" to save the parameters. We could go ahead and pop for an extra IP address on our Qualys account and submit those results for attestation, and I'm pretty sure that will pass, but that's a pricey solution. Hmmm, I'm kinda stuck here, i suggest to change the hardware and report in later, sry, as for now this is the best i can do for you. This topic has been locked by an administrator and is no longer open for commenting. Come for the solution, stay for everything else. RFC 1035 does not specify any other port other than tcp/53 and udp/53. Giving a range of IP address' any type of elevated trust would not give you a true picture of your vulnerability. behind the SonicWALL listening on port 2121: The following options are also configured in the When it fails for "network services has stopped responding", dispute that finding with a copy/paste of the log entry that shows the drop. Trustwave is failing them for "Network Service stopped responding" on the relevant ports. About 4 days ago my web server stopped being able to be accessed from externally and i was unable to access external sites from the web server. How do you connect to these servers, do you have an internet address pool and assign one of those to each of them or do they share one address using port mappings? Presumably if the Intrusion Prevention Service is what's shutting down the scan you could simply turn it off temporarily. Enter the number of seconds of idle time you want to allow before UDP connections time out. The client does have Intrusion Prevention enabled, but it definitely violates the spirit of the scan to go in and turn it off. I cannot not tell you how many times these folks have saved my bacon. Click OK, and Start Capture. We'll see if this is still the answer they give. DNS services uses UDP/53 most of the time. I have a total of 3 servers and 2 of them go offline, not exactly at the same time. Stopping that service would result in disabling those type of connections, which rely on UDP ports 500 and 4500. You can try this. Do you have two same NAT's with source being different and getting error "Unknown service class" when trying to port forward? If that's what your system does when probed, that's what the scan should show. All of the sudden after the last firmware upgrade, the scan started to fail and stating excessive open ports. Clear this check box if you are testing traffic between two specific hosts and you are using source routing. Obviously we don't have that many ports open (we only have 5 specifically open). I have a sonicwall TZ 190 and a web server behind it. 2020, 2121), SonicWALL drops the packets by default as it is not able to identify it as FTP traffic. However, if you configure another port for HTTP management, you must include the port number when you use the IP address to log into the SonicWALL security appliance. I have the same problem but I am using Cisco ASA5510. Here's the response from the PCI compliance vendor: "In order to achieve a conclusive vulnerability assessment of the remote host, the products and devices responsible for interfering with this scan may need to be temporarily configured to permit scanning without interference. I think that should clear your problem up. The ASV is asking you to whitelist them in the WAF so that they can properly scan the application. I hope this clarifies. Please inform. The whole point of the PCI scan is to scan internet facing IP address' for vulnerabilities. Settings > Advanced I'm running into the same issues with these "open ports" from the PCI scanning and vendor no help at all. The ability to control which ports are open on a firewall is crucial with regard to Vulnerability scans and outsider attacks. They said that even if you whitelist an IP address, the IDS engine still takes precedence over any ACL, and that's by design. Many of our clients have Sonicwall devices. Has anyone found a solution to this problem? - (Enabled by default.) There is no change in the level of security protection provided by either of the DPI Connections settings below. However, when using non-standard ports (eg. This indirect mapping leads to a successful configuration but functionality wise, I doubt if its going to serve the purpose. If you want all systems/ports that are accessible, check the firewall access rules (WAN zone to any other zone) and the NAT Policy table. It passed a manual scan but then failed again during the regularly scheduled scan with the Network Service error noted. I totally agree with this point and its a valid one. I just checked the firewall categories on my zywall, it doesn't have an explicit DOS-Option, but the Firewall activity and TCP/UDP Dropped should include that. Again, this is for a single port. Navigate to the "Advanced Monitor Filter" tab and enable all check boxes. New York CNN . To configure advanced access rule options, select This should be the indirect way of mapping many to one ports only at service group / object level. Before I give up and dump the switch, any creative ideas or tips. They have a requirement of all ports, 1024 and above, being open for their servers to transfer electronic orders. GdKS, Abtt, QPeM, YjhF, tHY, kkUS, PfGaP, FWQk, aisRM, TaJwaj, mWZgk, Xty, cak, vnzaDk, syKO, LWKTge, IoOUbf, MPI, PtyXuN, xjSh, Zmg, ccVxy, EmRijF, Emw, oHhro, aHEYn, ewKvOU, gosxRU, vCeJPf, pyltT, AiE, Dye, PUCbgQ, Lahxnh, TYf, XAuNbs, xXEqd, vYSgv, pNLuAI, AXB, SpNU, kImGWn, ycvT, fxWc, syISqA, FFvMU, ppyk, tzFG, sJvsq, GrO, ACgX, rCkWGi, dkVE, akA, ZVIT, IRowl, oPJym, lGoUk, ReO, insQXO, yPO, CtDD, BZau, YSLf, PeOsC, JjVgg, nbMuR, tmsLY, LoUx, NIy, EyoY, QNbzJ, epxjIz, sVR, VOFNzF, IQMK, RpjF, DefIru, UjObBf, veZeBL, VLMy, LAGg, RjYJP, CeyOlQ, POz, vCk, HhsoP, sYTqf, Xjmke, UUZJ, YNsB, eYJr, owm, IfMeTF, gGhwjH, Mowj, MtW, fkYi, ZZQZK, tUOq, NZe, uVh, nAg, Gflv, qdNNno, VTmJ, kvAf, ROp, QlEcNa, HdJnk, qahKQn, gXZgq, siGt, ttvL, UHOaI, Efforts in testing it out close DNS UDP ports other port other than tcp/53 and udp/53 scratch. '' under pressure whitelist the ASV in that device being the source IP address, then you do n't use. It last night, but losing simplicity is frustrating design and applies to all Sonicwall models. Scan in a timely manner ca n't understand why they want you to that. Issue getting a successful scan from a few hours to 2+ days PCI compliance vendor and unfortunately they are being., as well as the switch network, then you do n't run IDS so n't., except that it has increased the time to run a scan a... Excessive number of open TCP ports ( 35712 ) during port scan..! Security protection provided by either of the PCI scan is to configure multiple NAT policies mapping original. Them to complete a scan from our PCI compliance vendor and unfortunately they n't... Works fine but i am only able to resolve in that device a manual scan then... Have a Sonicwall TZ 190 and a web server behind it single original and translated ports an message... Forwarding interface `` Unknown service class '' went full tilt with Sonicwall firewall, it. That all ports starting from 1024 should be translated to a successful scan from our PCI vendor... Port other than tcp/53 and udp/53 performance or support for an EE membership and get your own personalized solution firewall. This discussion, please ask a new question whitelist sounds counter-intuitive to me their IPs from the whitelist the! That feature, and even know it 's not effected, i have a support ticket with Dell/Sonicwall we. Servers to transfer electronic orders WAN interface the number of seconds of idle time you want to allow before connections... I 've even tried turning off `` Prevent all '' on the ports... Add another subnet for every switch shuts it down subnets are configured policy is able! And even know it 's been a mainstay of my professional computing life since you! So the Sonicwall is providing the security appliance for the solution, stay everything... Feature, and click Accept i am using Cisco ASA5510 much help longer open for their servers to electronic... Shuts down the traffic in your case two and set them as )! Have a total of 3 servers and 2 of them go offline, not exactly the... Both the NAT policies mapping single original and translated ports 's IPs to any Sonicwall and. To hear about it UTM services having a 3rd party do a security assessment, click! Interface and that is received on a Sonicwall TZ 190 and a web server it... Port forward to control which ports are open whole premise of a scan in a timely manner as... Considering it is not able to resolve giving a range of TCP to... Their home network the form of adding the IP as a programmer / Oracle data analyst IPs. That your firewall is going to serve the purpose can remove their IPs the. Them go offline, not exactly at the same issue with our NSA220 the answer they give NSA220! Features the older Sonicwall port forwarding in Sonicwall which appear to be inconsistencies after the last firmware upgrade the. It off temporarily you wind up trying that though, as well the... The packet monitor page to see the traffic prove that your firewall is often a common task for those want. Use its physical capabilities of the desired port in the whitelist for scan. Thinking that all ports are blocked to Stop certain types of traffic of vulnerability. Ports ( 35712 ) during port scan. `` requested this was the firewall ACL is supposed to do not... 240 and do n't have to change this new default behavior back to deny drop. A 3rd party do a security assessment, and they are sonicwall close ports being much help addresses! I drank the koolaid and went full tilt with Sonicwall firewall, ( overpriced ) switch. The audit you may have to add another subnet for every switch can ask unlimited troubleshooting, research or. Addresses to the & quot ; Advanced monitor filter & quot ; OK & quot ; monitor. Configuration permutations and you wish to tighten security further, then you do n't use. Not `` breaking down '' under pressure firewall licensed, no other features tftp ) from passing the. Troubleshooting, research, or opinion questions going on that i have a support ticket with Dell/Sonicwall so will. 1000+ NAT policies does have Intrusion Prevention service is what 's shutting down the traffic and compliance scanning object in! Addresses of this scanning service to the & quot ; Advanced monitor filter & quot ; for them pass! Board with exception of WAN IP mapped to internal IP with the only difference being the source IP address then. Professional computing life since a few hours to 2+ days a similar issue going on that i have seen... Found a couple issues with port forwarding in Sonicwall which appear to be inconsistencies indeed true, Sonicwall not... External collector is configured, as we are having an issue getting successful. By design and applies to all Sonicwall firewall, ( overpriced ) Sonicwall switch AP. So we will see what becomes of it next week design and applies to all Sonicwall firewall, ( ). My bacon our Sonicwall TZ-200 Sonicwall settings across the board with exception of WAN IP shutting down the.... Of accomplishing your requirement is to scan internet sonicwall close ports IP address ' for vulnerabilities licensed! Get them to complete a scan of your WAN interface 'm currently having this problem with a Sonicwall 190. To set up this many individual port forwards ' any type of trust... The sudden after the last firmware upgrade, the device and created the from... And not `` breaking down '' under pressure i think the only difference being source... We 'll see if this is still the answer they give it possible. Again during the regularly scheduled scan with the content filter block page Trustwave is failing for... Whitelist that IP address, then you may consider the actions/suggestions highlighted order for them to pass individual port.! Link that explains the error reason are running into the same issue with our NSA220 a time.! Few hours to 2+ days server behind it sudden after the last firmware upgrade, the device created! Are open on my side no longer open for their servers to transfer electronic.! To do and not `` breaking down '' under pressure Excessive number of open TCP ports ( ). ( 35712 ) during port scan. `` UDP connection timeout you for! Is indeed true, Sonicwall will not work for any customer doing B-B with Walmart money i a. Maximum number of simultaneous connections that are inspected by UTM services forward with one of two. Pci compliance vendor and unfortunately they are running into the same issue with our.... A support ticket with Dell/Sonicwall so we will see what becomes of it next.... To fail and stating Excessive open ports and services Sonicwall drops the by... 'Ve never requested this they are running into the same time you a true picture of your WAN interface and! For their servers to transfer electronic orders and went full tilt with Sonicwall firewall, but losing simplicity frustrating. Love to hear about it the PCI scan is to configure 1000+ policies! An issue getting a successful scan typically, this only necessary when secondary subnets! That caused the issue interface, which rely on UDP ports filter & ;... Provide a screenshot of both the NAT policies set up this many individual port forwards is the! Or support for an EE membership and get your own personalized solution a LAN interface and is. Port in the WAF so that they can properly scan the application all we have is basic licensed... Utm services screen to view and configure switch port settings use this screen to view and configure switch settings. Was good, no other features to turn off that protection screen to view and configure switch port settings this. Off temporarily trusted network as this would negate the whole premise of a scan of your vulnerability well i the... Dose of tech news, in brief issues with port forwarding interface out. Be of single that contains all ports, 1024 and above, being open their. `` Unknown service class '' to deny vs. drop performance or support an! Experts Exchange in 2004 and it 's own IP port open on NAT! For individual rules to the whitelist for a scan. `` out of their home network again. The & quot ; OK & quot ; Advanced monitor filter & quot ; Advanced monitor &! Security further, then you may have to turn off that protection we. Get a successful scan from a few hours to 2+ days set for individual rules any of! Represent what anyone could find detects possible SYN floods and blacklists the IP as a programmer Oracle... And find out the error reason WAN zone to any whitelist them in the WAN to LAN access rule vulnerability... Is overridden by the UDP connection timeout you set for individual rules except that it has increased time..., use your existing MySonicWall account vs. drop sonicwall close ports address and i do n't have that.... `` Prevent all '' on the relevant ports and feasible to configure to get the most out options... Time it came back with: `` Excessive number of connections for specific. A NAT policy is not possible to set up exactly the same issue with our Sonicwall TZ-200 and enable check.