Encryption Content Filter: Enc & Deliver Now vs. Enc on Delivery
My understanding is that the difference between "Encrypt & Deliver Now" vs. "Encrypt on Delivery" is that former encrypts and sends the message immediately whereas the latter continues with the message processing and encrypts the message later prior to send.
What are some of the pratical examples for processing that can happen in the message pipeline which may require "Enc on Delivery"? What is the best pratice and the guidance for selecting the right option?
If I misconfigure and set the "Enc & Deliver Now" when some processing is short circuited, would IronPort detect the condition and notify the admin via logging or other methods?
your explanation is correct, a common scenario for both of this cases would be an outbound setup that uses DLP and filters. In this setup, senders could actively flag their messages to be encrypted, i.e. using the secure plugin to add a header, or to put "Encrypt" in the subject. Now we have two possible cases, or requirements:
- All sensitive data must be encrypted
- Sensitive data leaving the company reqires further inspection or approval
In the first case, any message flagged for encryption won't need further inspection, and the message may just go directly to the delivery queue. This saves resources that DLP would need to scan the message, which is not really nessesary. Yet still DLP would take care of any sensitve date if the user "forgets" to flag it appropriatiely
The second case would be something where certain content may not leave the company at all, so we still want DLP to check on that, and delete or bounce the message. Also for anything where the message is sent to a quarantine (Filter, DLP), depending on the action on the quarantine, the message will be either delayed, or will be encrypted when released from the quarantine.
Of course, in many cases there may be a combined setup of both kind of filter actions, applied to different policies, where the action is depending on the sender or recipient. Regarding your last question about possible misconfiguration, if I understand you correctly if there is a warning in the logs when a filter action flags a message to bypasssome further processing. There is no such thing by default, so you would add a "Log Entry" to the filter if you want to have the action documented in the logs.
With the enhancements in ISE 3.0 for integrating with Azure AD via SAML IdP, it is now possible to leverage Microsoft Single Sign-On for multiple ISE Portals (for example Sponsor and Guest/BYOD Portals).
At the time of this writing, ISE cann...
With the enhancements in ISE 3.0 for integrating with Azure AD via SAML IdP, it is now possible to create a BYOD Flow to provide Wireless network access using an employee’s Azure AD credentials.
The table below shows the whole Cisco Security solutions + Splunk integrations add-ons. Kindly let me know if I have missed some add-ons or if there are any new updates. Thank you!
Hope this will be helpful for everyone who is looking for Splunk in...
A python based script to generate report if there are disabled rules under an Access Control Policy and an option to delete those rules in bulk.
Step 1 Download the script on PCStep 2 Make sure python3 is installed on PC and have reach...
A python based script to generate report if there are double logging on FMC ACP (logging at beginning and end), having rule action "Allow" or "Trust". (Option1 )
Also, the logging at the begging will be disabled if logging is detected for both beginning ...