What your rule said in the FROM tab, "internal or local host" ?
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Device
-----Original Message-----
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tue May 15 16:41:56 2007
Subject: [isalist] Re: 0x800733f5 error & order of polices issue
Thanks, Amy. I have created an all outbound rule to the destination IP
address and only see the connections to TCP 57017 denied by the last rule
(SBS Internet Access). Unfortunately I am being challenged by:
* The software developer insists the software must run on the server;
which happens to be SBS 2003 Prem.
* The software developer (at this point) will not go beyond stating that
TCP 57017 is the only necessary network traffic to be permitted
* The software is key this business and there really aren't many
alternatives
* The software runs on the SBS server which is also the ISA server (which
should still be possible to figure out)
* ISA monitoring is not providing me anymore detail other than the denied
TCP 57017 connection; although I will run another test
* The software does not have any network settings or pseudo /
non-compatible CERN Web proxy settings
* The all Outbound rule you suggested did not work; although I will run
another test
* The software worked before the ISA firewall was installed because they
simply had NAT router without true firewall functionality
Cheers,
...D
On 5/15/07, Amy Babinchak <amy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Danny,
The order of your policies is not being ignored. Isa will read
them top down. Since you're hitting the SBS Internet Access rule this means
that the traffic does not apply to the rule that you have created. When
that's the case, ISA moves on down checks the next rule. Finally it reaches
the SBS Internet Access Rule and since there's no authentication it is
denied.
So, as I said before, the rule isn't configured correctly. You
need to find out what that apps wants and the configure your rule
accordingly or take my suggestion and set up a rule allowing all outbound to
that specific IP address.
Amy
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
] On Behalf Of Danny
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:07 PM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: 0x800733f5 error & order of polices issue
Jim,
I appreciate your educational tidbits, but when you are dealing
with humans and software sometimes assumptions are inevitable. In fact, it
is clear that you are not immune to making assumptions.
1) By stating the obvious that "Assumptions get you nowhere", you
assume that assuming is my favorite activity and always gets me positive
results
2) By providing a WSUS and AU 101, you assume that I did not
understand the difference between a WSUS client and an Internet-based
Automatic Update client, did not read the KB's, was not the one who
installed WSUS, and have no clue
3) By challenging my knowledge of who Amy is, you assume that I
had no idea who Amy is and didn't care. First of all, where did I not show
respect to Amy? Secondly, do you want all ISA list posts to begin with "Yes,
I know who Amy is, so um don't ask me"?
Anyway, yes, I did bring up some Microsoft pain points and I will
respond to any further responses offline. As you know this list has been
very flexible with OT posts, so my addition is nothing to call home about.
Re: cutting off the thread, I would say 70% of the reply content
is redundant and has no value in the conversation. The archives should be
stored by threaded conversation, but I will respond in the format you
request.
I will analyze the ISAINFO output, but for future reference, can
you please direct me to documentation that will explain why the order of
polices is being ignored OR why I would not see all denied traffic in the
ISA 2004 SP2 monitoring default state (Log record type = Firewall or Web
Proxy & Log time = LiveConnection Status = live)?
Thanks,
...D
On 5/15/07, Jim Harrison <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.ISAserver.org
-------------------------------------------------------
Assumptions get you nowhere.
You brought up the plethora of pain-points - expect
someone to answer
them.
WSUS and the Internet-based updates process works very
differently,
because the WSUS server determines for the client what is
required and
what is not. Amy has a clue (several, actually); this is
a rare
commodity in the SBS community and you should feel free to
take
advantage of it when it appears.
Also, please stop cutting off the thread. It makes
archive searches
very nearly meaningless.
Regarding the "custom app", the log snips you provide
clearly indicate
that your rule is not being applied, since the denying
rule is quoted as
"SBS Internet Access Rule".
The best way to express your ISA policies is to use
ISAInfo.
You can respond offline if you like.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
On Behalf Of Danny
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 7:53 AM
To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [isalist] Re: 0x800733f5 error & order of polices
issue
On 5/15/07, Amy Babinchak < amy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Your rule must not be configured correctly. What
does your
custom rule look like? The only reason that the SBS
Internet Access Rule
would deny anything outbound is if the app isn't
authenticating. It's
not uncommon. My bet is that the app doesn't only require
that specific
TCP high port but a range of them. I'd base the rule on
the IP address
it's trying to reach instead.
The policy is: Custom Protcol TCP 57017 Outbound, from
Local Host, to
External, All Users.
Warning the following section is OT:
Yes, the SVCHOST issue is a nuisance. The
screeching is loud on
the mailing lists. It took me a while to figure out what
everyone was
complaining about then I realized that I use WSUS
everywhere. Implement
WSUS you'll be much happier.
You imply that WSUS clients are immune to this? Most of
our affected
systems are part of WSUS installs. My understanding is the
Automatic
Update service (aka part of svchost.exe) scans the same
way a non-WSUS
client does, therefore they are both affected.
Sorry for bringing this OT item into the conversation, but
the last two
months in particular have been difficult to support
Microsoft
environments when dealing with DNS RPC mgmt vulnerability,
ISA 2004 SP3
install woes, a publicly unavailable (two hours MS PSS
phone call) KB
for restoring the ability to publish Outlook forms to the
Organizational
Forms Library in Exchange, and this AU/svchost issue - but
looks like
there is a follow-up:
http://blogs.technet.com/wsus/archive/2007/05/15/srvhost-msi-issue-follo <
http://blogs.technet.com/wsus/archive/2007/05/15/srvhost-msi-issue-follo>
w-up.aspx
Anyway, can we focus on what I am doing wrong with this
ISA issue, that
would be much appreciated.
...D
All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
------------------------------------------------------
List Archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/
ISA Server Newsletter:
http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp <
http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp>
ISA Server Articles and Tutorials:
http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/
ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/ <
http://blogs.isaserver.org/>
------------------------------------------------------
Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other
sites:
http://www.techgenix.com
------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe visit
http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp
Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
CPDE - Certified Petroleum Distribution Engineer
CCBC - Certified Canadian Beer Consumer
ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity <
http://www.exchangedefender.com/verify.asp?id=l4FIaBX8016705&from=amy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
--
CPDE - Certified Petroleum Distribution Engineer
CCBC - Certified Canadian Beer Consumer
