- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Setting ICMP/UDP Virtual Session Timeout
It's my first post just want to hello to all!
I have been analyzing the PCI compliance report for my Fortigate Firewall (100D). It fails on the below item:
Check the ICMP Virtual Session Timeout is set
Check the UDP Virtual Session Timeout is set
Is it referring to the session-ttl value or is it about something else? The session-ttl is set to 3600s by default.
Check the ICMP Virtual Session Timeout is set Check the UDP Virtual Session Timeout is set
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hello Jacky,
Welcome to the Fortinet Forum.
I am not sure what exactly the PCI report is referring to.
However, on the Fortigate, both the UDP idle timer and ICMP ttl are different from the session-ttl.
For UDP, below takes effect:
config sys global set udp-idle-timer 180 end
And ICMP, by default, it is 60 seconds ttl.
Hope that helps
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thanks vjoshi. I just got a reply from Fortigate support. He suggests to apply the below config:
config firewall policy edit <firewall policy ID) set timeout-send-rst enable set session-ttl <example: (300)> default value is 0 end
I haven't applied the change yet. I guess I will give it a try. However, I still don't quite get what the report is complaining about, since I see that the icmp/udp sessions disappearing after the TTL count reaching 0.
The PCI report is a feature for v5.4. System > Advance > Compliance.
It generates a report and a list of items for us fine tune.
http://docs.fortinet.com/uploaded/files/2874/fortigate-pci-dss-compliance-54.pdf
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
I am seeing a similar issue with version 6.0.2 for the same reason.
Did you end up applying that fix, some other, or just ignoring the issue in the report?
Thanks!
