Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 3190 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
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

Getting a site recatagorized that has "proxy" as part of it's name? www.proxyvote.com

AllanD

We have a site some people use called www.proxyvote.com.  It's for proxy voting on stocks, bonds, funds, etc.  It has NOTHING to do with anonymizers which is what the site is being categorized as.  I have submitted this site multiple times as have some co-workers but it isn't being removed.  I'm assuming Sophos sees the word "proxy" in the name and that's why.  For the time being I added in a exception filter called "Sites to allow through" and added in the pattern ^[A-Za-z0-9.-]*\.proxyvote\.com/ . 

Is this the best way to do this or is there another way to manually recatagorize the site locally on my XG?

-Allan



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    There are two ways in XG v16.

    Web > Categories, Add
    Call it "Sites that should be Allowed".  Put in domain name.
    In the Policy, create a high level rule that says things of that category are allowed.

     

    Web > URL Groups, Add
    Call it "Sites that should be Allowed".  Put in domain name.
    In the Policy, create a high level rule that says things of that category are allowed.

     

    Yes...  we have both Custom Categories and URL Groups that effectively do the same thing.

  • 0 in reply to Michael Dunn

    So right now under Protect -> Web -> Exceptions I made a "Sites to Allow Through" rule with the description "Sites being incorrectly blocked".  I had another come up, also categorized as a anonymizer for some reason, that I've added:

     

    ^[A-Za-z0-9.-]*\.cbizhelp\.com/
    ^[A-Za-z0-9.-]*\.proxyvote\.com/
     
    For "Skip the selected checks or actions" I've only checked "Policy".
     
    Is this a acceptable way of getting around these until they are re-catagorized?  Or should I do it your way?
     
     
    -Allan
  • +1 in reply to AllanD

    Exceptions are another way of allowing things.  It is a bigger hammer, more exact because you can use regex (though more dangerous if you write it incorrectly), but is also turns off other checks such as filetype blocking.  They also automatically apply to every policy.

    URL Groups or Custom Categories are more precise in resolving the specific category issue.

    Exceptions get evaluated on every single request.  Badly written RegEx can be inefficient.  Hundreds of inefficient RegEx could affect performance on every single request.  URL Groups are more efficient - they still get applied to every request but straight text matches on domain names are much faster.  Custom Categories are the most efficient.  That being said, excluding poor RegEx we are probably talking microseconds.

    One difference is in reporting and logging.  The Custom Category would appear in the report.  A URL Group or Exception would still have the original category.

    For you, that regex looks good and if you only have a few dozen then it should be fine in Exceptions.

  • 0 in reply to Michael Dunn

    Thank-you for your reply.  That makes sense.  I'll leave it as is unless we start getting a bunch of these in which case I'll follow your directions.

     

    -Allan

Reply Children
No Data