<?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 ASA - Security Levels Question in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-security-levels-question/m-p/1145127#M861199</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I understand that you can go from a higher security interface to a lower security interface without configuring acls.  The ASDM shows that there is an implicit rule allowing this.  My question is - once I configure an access rule on the ASDM, that line disappears.  Does that mean that I no longer have an implicit rule allowing me to go from a higher security interface to a lower security interface.  I am entering a rule to allow a DMZ interface (level 50) to reach some internal servers on the inside (level 100).  Once I configure this rule, have I now cutoff access to the level 0 interface?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 15:14:31 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jim_berlow</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T15:14:31Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ASA - Security Levels Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-security-levels-question/m-p/1145127#M861199</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I understand that you can go from a higher security interface to a lower security interface without configuring acls.  The ASDM shows that there is an implicit rule allowing this.  My question is - once I configure an access rule on the ASDM, that line disappears.  Does that mean that I no longer have an implicit rule allowing me to go from a higher security interface to a lower security interface.  I am entering a rule to allow a DMZ interface (level 50) to reach some internal servers on the inside (level 100).  Once I configure this rule, have I now cutoff access to the level 0 interface?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 15:14:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-security-levels-question/m-p/1145127#M861199</guid>
      <dc:creator>jim_berlow</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T15:14:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ASA - Security Levels Question</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-security-levels-question/m-p/1145128#M861202</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Jim,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;No, the higher levels will still be able to go out. Have you noticed a problem?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;HTH,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;John&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:55:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/asa-security-levels-question/m-p/1145128#M861202</guid>
      <dc:creator>John Blakley</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-03T20:55:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

