<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: TrustSec Matrix population in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778704#M579937</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;That plan would work , if you enable the monitor mode for the SGACL , that will allow you to perform the testing you need without performing enforcement , but it will give you an idea if the counters for the rules you configure are receiving hits , please refer to this documentation that might help you&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-knowledge-base/trustsec-troubleshooting-guide/ta-p/3647576#toc-hId--1008668375" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-knowledge-base/trustsec-troubleshooting-guide/ta-p/3647576#toc-hId--1008668375&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2023 18:02:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Rodrigo Diaz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-02-20T18:02:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>TrustSec Matrix population</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778605#M579929</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am making the transition to SGT/SGACL for enforcement. When I create an SGT, it auto populates in the matrix. I have found this a bit difficult to work with because I am trying to slowly phase in. So I have the following questions.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;OL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;If a tag is present in the source/destination but has no SGAL applied does that mean there is no enforcement or propagation to the switch? My default action is permit.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;I found that if I look in the source tree section instead of the matrix that I can add or remove the entire line of the matrix instead of cell by cell. In order to keep the policy optimized, is this the right approach? Should I only have source/destinations that I actually need policy for?&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/OL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example: I will not have Byod policy yet, but I want the tag. So I started out going into each cell for BYOD and making sure there was no SGACL applied. But then I found that by going to the source tree that I could remove BYOD completely as a source. Which is the right option?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="JoshMorris_0-1676905525031.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/176876i9B022D3F7C08F351/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="JoshMorris_0-1676905525031.png" alt="JoshMorris_0-1676905525031.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:16:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778605#M579929</guid>
      <dc:creator>Josh Morris</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-20T15:16:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: TrustSec Matrix population</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778667#M579931</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/291510"&gt;@Josh Morris&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;, answering your queries.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1.- If you don't have a SGACL assigned between tags X and Y , your assumption is correct , the default SGACL that you have configured in the matrix comes in that place ( in your scenario the default permit ) .&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2,- Your approach is correct in both scenarios from matrix and from source tree you can configure the SGACL accordingly , while implementing this kind of enforcement a specific&amp;nbsp; SGACL can be assigned from X to Y , and from Y to X , with the model you are using you need to only populate the tags you want to enforce .&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Let me know if that helped you.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2023 16:46:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778667#M579931</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rodrigo Diaz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-20T16:46:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: TrustSec Matrix population</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778674#M579933</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/632778"&gt;@Rodrigo Diaz&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;, this is helpful.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm thinking more from a deployment perspective now, would it make the most sense for me to remove all previously configured policy (Done initially as I thought it made sense to have it there), and start only with the policy that I'm ready to deploy. Based on my original image, I am not ready to deploy the policy I originally created. So I'm thinking I'll remove it for now, let the traffic hit the default rule of PERMIT, then add policy as I'm ready for it to be active. I also understand that I can change these policies into MONITOR state, which would allow them to report statistics but not enforce traffic.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2023 16:55:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778674#M579933</guid>
      <dc:creator>Josh Morris</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-20T16:55:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: TrustSec Matrix population</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778704#M579937</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;That plan would work , if you enable the monitor mode for the SGACL , that will allow you to perform the testing you need without performing enforcement , but it will give you an idea if the counters for the rules you configure are receiving hits , please refer to this documentation that might help you&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-knowledge-base/trustsec-troubleshooting-guide/ta-p/3647576#toc-hId--1008668375" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/security-knowledge-base/trustsec-troubleshooting-guide/ta-p/3647576#toc-hId--1008668375&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2023 18:02:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/trustsec-matrix-population/m-p/4778704#M579937</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rodrigo Diaz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-20T18:02:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

