<?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 Blocking/Shunning Hosts with Service Policy Rules in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088087#M393834</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have an ASA 5510 deployed and we are getting a tonne of port scanning traffic (who isn't these days) and ping traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The threat scanning thresholds seem a bit too high and was wondering if there is a way to use a Service Policy Rule to perform a Shun/Block of the hosts rather than the firewall simply blocking the request via the ACL and sending a reply.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In other words, if I do nothing, I know the ACL is protecting the resources but it is still replying to the client connection. I want the end result to be the same as a "Shun" where the connection is dropped and no reply is sent.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone have an example of how to employ Service Policy Rules to thwart Port Scanning and/or IP Spoofing?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 00:40:05 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>victorr001</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-12T00:40:05Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Blocking/Shunning Hosts with Service Policy Rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088087#M393834</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have an ASA 5510 deployed and we are getting a tonne of port scanning traffic (who isn't these days) and ping traffic.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The threat scanning thresholds seem a bit too high and was wondering if there is a way to use a Service Policy Rule to perform a Shun/Block of the hosts rather than the firewall simply blocking the request via the ACL and sending a reply.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In other words, if I do nothing, I know the ACL is protecting the resources but it is still replying to the client connection. I want the end result to be the same as a "Shun" where the connection is dropped and no reply is sent.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone have an example of how to employ Service Policy Rules to thwart Port Scanning and/or IP Spoofing?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2019 00:40:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088087#M393834</guid>
      <dc:creator>victorr001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-12T00:40:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Blocking/Shunning Hosts with Service Policy Rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088088#M393835</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;service resetoutside&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;command sets ASA to send TCP RST to denied traffic but it is disabled by default. That is, denied incoming packets are dropped silently by default.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2012 14:04:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088088#M393835</guid>
      <dc:creator>Peter Koltl</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-12-22T14:04:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Blocking/Shunning Hosts with Service Policy Rules</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088089#M393836</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt; Thanks for the tip Peter.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was really hoping to find a solution using the service policy if possible so that I could tune the parameters on packets per second, source ip, etc and be more specific about how to block these attacks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The end result would be to reset the connection, but, the logic around whether it should be reset or not is what I am interested in.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2012 21:40:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/blocking-shunning-hosts-with-service-policy-rules/m-p/2088089#M393836</guid>
      <dc:creator>victorr001</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-12-22T21:40:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

