> Source: [sk167456](https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/sk167456)

# sk167456 - Policy Verifier does not recognize conflict with bi-directional rule

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| Solution ID | sk167456 |
| Date Created | 2020-06-17 |
| Last Modified | 2021-09-23 |
| Technical Level | Advanced |
| Products | Security Management Server, Multi-Domain Security Management Server |
| Versions | R82.10, R82, R81.20, R82.10, R82.20, R81.20, R82, R82.20 |

## Symptoms

- * When user blocks any traffic to HOST_B and then in the next rule allows traffic from HOST_A to HOST_B -- the Policy Verifier sees a conflict. Example

  Rule 4 is completely redundant, since every packet it can handle will already be dropped by rule 3:


  ![](https://sc1.checkpoint.com/sc/SolutionsStatics/NEW_SK_NOID1592212650215/correct_verification202006151229081.png)

* When user blocks any traffic to HOST_B and then uses bi-directional rule (HOST_A-\>HOST_B and HOST_B-\>HOST_A), the Policy Verifier does not see any conflict. Example

  Any packet with HOST_A as a destination won't be handled by rule 3 -- and if its source happens to be HOST_A or HOST_B, it will be handled by rule 4. So there is definitely no conflict here:


  ![](https://sc1.checkpoint.com/sc/SolutionsStatics/NEW_SK_NOID1592212650215/NOTcorrect_verification202006151231592.png)

## Solution

This solution requires authentication. Please log in to view the full solution.

---

# Agent Instructions

This content is from the Check Point Support Center (https://support.checkpoint.com), the official knowledge base for Check Point cybersecurity products.

## Navigating This Knowledge Base

- **Complete index**: [llms.txt](https://support.checkpoint.com/llms.txt)
- **All SK articles**: [SecureKnowledge Sitemap](https://support.checkpoint.com/sitemaps/secureknowledge-sitemap-index.xml)
- **SK article URL pattern**: `https://support.checkpoint.com/results/sk/{skId}`
- **Markdown responses**: AI bot User-Agents automatically receive `text/markdown` content