Security

last person joined: yesterday 

Forum to discuss Enterprise security using HPE Aruba Networking NAC solutions (ClearPass), Introspect, VIA, 360 Security Exchange, Extensions, and Policy Enforcement Firewall (PEF).
Expand all | Collapse all

CPPM: Service policy question about rule

This thread has been viewed 0 times
  • 1.  CPPM: Service policy question about rule

    Posted Feb 16, 2017 11:12 AM

    Hi,

    I use non-Aruba NAS with Clearpass and need to limit user access as in the filed "simultaneous_use" of my guest account

     

    My condition is trying to check %{GuestUser:session_limit} instead of fixed number like 3, but it does not seem to work

     

    When I check INPUT data in the "access tracker" it correctly shows in authorization attributes
    Authorization:[Endpoints Repository]:Unique-Device-Count    4, and in computed attributes GuestUser:simultaneous_use    2

    That is my enforcement policy which does not seem to properly validate rule #1, why?   It works fine when I enter fixed number instead of %{GuestUser:session_limit}

    Screen Shot 2017-02-16 at 10.47.07 AM.png

     



  • 2.  RE: CPPM: Service policy question about rule

    Posted Feb 17, 2017 08:14 AM

    Hmm.. Unique device count is number of devices registered in the endpoints database connected to that guest user. It is not the number of active sessions for that user.

     

    Also - you are using session_limit instead of simultanous_use.



  • 3.  RE: CPPM: Service policy question about rule

    Posted Feb 17, 2017 09:12 AM

    That is what I want to achive compare number of devices registered with active sessions for that user so whatever is in simultanous_use for the particular guest in database is limititing that user.

     

    I tried this and it also does not work:

     (Authorization:[Endpoints Repository]:Unique-Device-Count  GREATER_THAN  %{GuestUser:simultanous_use})

    How to do the proper rule?



  • 4.  RE: CPPM: Service policy question about rule

    Posted Feb 20, 2017 10:04 AM

    Let me ask like that. Can I use %{GuestUser:simultaneous_use} as a value while making condition in a policy enforcemnt?