carmik 0 Posted December 6, 2023 Share Posted December 6, 2023 (edited) Using an ESET VA for years now. We've got a x.y.64.0/22 private address reserved for our clients, with the gateway residing on x.y.64.1. Obviously, the range of this network is x.y.64.0 - x.y.67.255. We've got a rule Network gateways . IP gateway ≠ (not equal) x.y.64.1 and a dynamic group based on it. Still, we see some (not all) systems in this dynamic group having ip addresses like x.y.65.z, x.y.66.z, x.y.67.z, for which we have confirmed that the gateway is x.y.64.1 and, hence, should not appear in this dynamic group. We presume that the rule actually somehow involves an assumption for a /24 mask (which is not the case here) which explains why there are no systems having addresses like x.y.64.z. We reported the issue to the local ESET distributor, insisting to file this as a bug, but only mitigations have been provided (ie specify subnets, instead of the gateway address). This is a very low priority issue for us, so we have not taken any mitigating actions, but we'd appreciate if you investigated this issue and, possibly, fixed it in a future version. Edited December 6, 2023 by carmik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmik 0 Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 (bump) Anyone from ESET care to discuss this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts