Should be easy answer, I just want to confirm if I am doing this right as I've started a new UTM from scratch and couldn't transfer over my definitions due to hardware change.
I regularly get ranges of IPs which although coming from specific countries, evade country filtering and rotate IPs to brute force. I have a firewall rule and an underlying network definition that I use called known attackers to block at the firewall layer; I also use this definition in NAT and email protection. Instead of entering individual IPs I normally create a subsequent definition in known attackers with the type network and enter the IPs in the style of 192.168.1.0 and subnetmask 255.255.255.0 with the final octet a zero to denote the entire range. Is this correct, or should I be using the range definition and setting 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.255?
Thanks,
Jared
This thread was automatically locked due to age.