![]() ![]() My first thought was that this could quickly become an administrative headache in a client environment, where multiple network rules reference different web filtering policies in different places. Once I’d work out the logic of the UI, I setup some basic rules and the first thing that hit me was that to create just a simple rule which on on ASA or UTM would follow a pattern of the XG had several extra options such as the Zone, NAT rules, Malware Scanning and Web Filtering. I did issue a command in the shell of the appliance I’d found after some Googling but had no joy so decided it was time to power on the XG (which is still free and allows for an unlimited amount of IPs, instead restricted to 4 cores and 6GB RAM) and get myself acquainted with the UI. What I suspect has happened is that in commissioning and decommissioning several VMs as part of studying since the UTM was installed it has indeed observed 48 IPs pass through it and that there is either no aging of the entries or the aging period is quite long. Now, I’m definitely a network geek so have a couple of IP cams, a NAS, two laptops and a desktop, a couple of VMs and perhaps 3 or 4 phones – but certainly not 50 IP’d devices that would have went through the firewall. The UTM kindly notified me that I was using 48 out of 50 IP addresses and that new devices would fail to work when exceeded. I really didn’t have any time to work out the navigation so quickly abandoned the VM and there it laid dormant until just last week… I very quickly noticed the XG was completely different from the UTM in terms of the UI, having lost the nice drag and drop objects from firewall rules as well as condensing the navigation down to six categories: Dashboard, Reports, Policies, Protection, System and Objects. The UTM has worked faultlessly and I’m astounded that something so refined is available for free to the public with a very reasonable allowance of 50 internal IP addresses and when I’d heard Sophos had released a shiny new appliance, their XG product, I was keen to give it a test drive. Originally my intention was to just test out its features as I was already using a pfSense VM to isolate my lab environment from my live environment, however I started to see the massive potential in the device and eventually retired pfSense in order to make use of the easy to use interface, free AV, web filtering and client VPN with 2FA. I’ve been using a Sophos UTM9 virtual appliance for some time now.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |