This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

XG V18 MR3

Hello Sophos,
can we still expect the XG V18 MR 3 this week ?




[locked by: FloSupport at 4:35 PM (GMT -7) on 13 Oct 2020]
Parents Reply
  • Choose an AD group that will constantly synced with the XG. I can import groups and the including members, but if I remove a user from the group at AD, the access at the XG is not removed. At least this is my last experience a few MR's ago. 

Children
  • Did you try to reauthenticate with the users whos group membership has changed. From my experience, sync actions are only done upon authentication.

  • Sure I did this. The User was able to login, though he was not longer in the ad group.

  • Removing a user from an ad group does - in my opinion - not block him from authenticating against the firewall. From my understanding he will be then assigned to the default group "Open Group". Please check this.

  • Seems to be a general problem to delete something (for example IP Object)

  • XG will not delete the user in this phase. It will simply authenticate this user in the next authentication phase. So if the user is removed from a group or inactive in AD, XG will try to talk to the AD. AD will tell XG the current status. 

    If the user is placed on XG, does not matter, as XG will not grant access without the matching group and the correct password. 

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  • But from what I understand, removing a user from an ad group should only put him back to the default group. Therefor the user will be able to access the user portal, even when not having any permission assign inside the default group, am I correct?

    This is something I would love to see, like in Sophos SG, so being able to specify group membership for such firewall services and don't sync users, that could not authenticate against the firewall based on the permission scope, if you understand what I mean ;)