On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:08:03 +0200, Daniel Hartmeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 04:46:40PM +0530, Siju George wrote: > Not really. It can give a false sense of security, because you assume > the 'adaptive' part can't be tricked by the attacker. See > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=104905480700002 > > for more details.
Thanks a lot Dan, I get more informed by all these mails and links you precious people provide. I come from a Microsoft Windows background with some linux experience also. And the only firewall I have ever used was Zonealarm on a Windows 2000. And the information I have mostly about security is from Symantec. Thats the problem. Sorry for that. I am working on improving my knowledge. Thankyou once again for the kindness you showed to reply. As Raju Suggested I should learn more about TCP/IP. God bless you. > > In short, pf doesn't have such a feature, and it's unlikely that it will > have. If it's an essential requirement for you, you'll have to look > elsewhere. > > Daniel > Its not the feature I want but enhanced security with or with out the feature but what is best! Actually my decision to replace the Windows 2000 firewall with OpenBSD was put down initially by most people! Everyone told me to go for Linux. But I didn't because I was convinced about OpenBSD's superiority over Linux in Security from all that I read especialy the testimony and after working hard for 4 months mainly during non office hours with OpenBSD 3.5 by the Grace of God I have succeeded to replace the Microsoft Windows with the OpenBSD 3.5 firewall. Thanks a lot Danny for your work and leading in PF! May the Good Lord bless you PF and OpenBSD. warm regards Siju
