On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:33:57PM +0800, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 at 21:22, wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:17:17PM +0800, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming
> > wrote:
> > > Subject: I can confirm that Fortigate
On Donnerstag, 22. Juni 2023 15:33:57 CEST Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming
wrote:
> I think Fortinet wouldn't say.
They are required to ;-)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 at 21:22, wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:17:17PM +0800, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming
> wrote:
> > Subject: I can confirm that Fortigate firewalls are definitely based on
> > Linux
> >
> > Good day from Singapore,
>
> [...]
&g
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:17:17PM +0800, Turritopsis Dohrnii Teo En Ming wrote:
> Subject: I can confirm that Fortigate firewalls are definitely based on Linux
>
> Good day from Singapore,
[...]
> Do you guys know which Linux distro Fortigate firewalls are based on?
> I wou
Subject: I can confirm that Fortigate firewalls are definitely based on Linux
Good day from Singapore,
These few days, I have discovered that the output of the Fortigate
firewall CLI command "diag hardware sysinfo cpu" is exactly the same
as the output of the command "cat /proc/cp
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 7:22 AM deloptes wrote:
> Dan Ritter wrote:
>
> > After install you have a powerful L3 firewall system available to
> > you, but not configured to block anything.
> >
> > There are two command-line interfaces to it, iptables and
> > nftables. nftables is the newer interface,
Dan Ritter wrote:
> After install you have a powerful L3 firewall system available to
> you, but not configured to block anything.
>
> There are two command-line interfaces to it, iptables and
> nftables. nftables is the newer interface, but iptables has more
> documentation written.
>
> You
Hi.
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 07:11:12AM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> riveravaldez wrote:
> >
> > If I can ask: which is the situation, in this aspect, in a plain
> > plain/straightforward Debian (net)installation? Let's say: what's the
> > by-default setting of the system?
>
>
> After
riveravaldez wrote:
>
> If I can ask: which is the situation, in this aspect, in a plain
> plain/straightforward Debian (net)installation? Let's say: what's the
> by-default setting of the system?
After install you have a powerful L3 firewall system available to
you, but not configured to
On Ma, 04 aug 20, 22:56:21, riveravaldez wrote:
>
> If I can ask: which is the situation, in this aspect, in a plain
> plain/straightforward Debian (net)installation? Let's say: what's the
> by-default setting of the system?
There is no firewall configured by default in Debian.
The
On 2020-08-05 00:51, Dan Ritter wrote:
mick crane wrote:
I've never really understood firewalls. I think the idea is that they
don't
let anything in that wasn't requested but if you go on a website there
are
so many hundreds of scripts looking at this and that who knows what
happens.
I
On 8/4/20, Dan Ritter wrote:
> mick crane wrote:
>> I've never really understood firewalls. I think the idea is that they
>> don't
>> let anything in that wasn't requested but if you go on a website there
>> are
>> so many hundreds of scripts looking at this a
mick crane wrote:
> I've never really understood firewalls. I think the idea is that they don't
> let anything in that wasn't requested but if you go on a website there are
> so many hundreds of scripts looking at this and that who knows what happens.
I notice you didn't ask a question,
mick crane wrote:
> I've never really understood firewalls. I think the idea is that they
> don't let anything in that wasn't requested but if you go on a website
> there are so many hundreds of scripts looking at this and that who knows
> what happens.
this is a good point :
I've never really understood firewalls. I think the idea is that they
don't let anything in that wasn't requested but if you go on a website
there are so many hundreds of scripts looking at this and that who knows
what happens.
mick
--
Key ID4BFEBB31
Alberto,
What you want to do is possible. In particular, skype and bittorrent do it.
As I understand it, they make use of a server with a public IP address. I'm
not going to get it exactly right, but the general idea is this:
Two clients, A and B, both behind NAT firewalls. Server, S
idea is this:
Two clients, A and B, both behind NAT firewalls. Server, S, with a public
IP, i.e. *not* behind NAT.
A calls S and says I want to talk to B. (This is possible because the call
is originated inside A's NAT)
At approximately the same time, B calls S and says I'm willing
On Apr 22, 2013, at 4:55 AM, Celejar wrote:
Yes: http://m19s28.dyndns.org/iblech/nat-traverse/#technique
General discussion:
http://www.h-online.com/security/features/How-Skype-Co-get-round-firewalls-747197.html
Celejar
Thanks! Interesting stuff...
Rick
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Hello,
Bob Proulx a écrit :
You first mentioned connecting to a server so I guessed ssh. That was
apparently not what you were asking about. Now you mention packages.
I could guess that you want to set up an apt proxy of some sort. Is
that what you are asking about? A way to set up an
for
every specific case. And I usually do so. But i was looking for a generic
way to use in a third party (openvpn server overaseas) to just handle the
establishment of the connection somehow avoiding all firewalls. Some way
for B to know I want to establish ssh conection with him and once
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:00 PM, alberto fuentes paj...@gmail.com wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make it a little more clear. Both computer A and B know about Server.
Right now I use openvpn to bring all the computers together into the same
network.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:00 PM, alberto fuentes paj...@gmail.com wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make a direct connection between A and B with ssh, you need to have at
least on of them be publicly available even if the other is blocked behind
a
alberto fuentes wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make it a little more clear. Both computer A and B know about Server.
Right now I use openvpn to bring all the computers together into the same
network. But it seems too much overhead being both
Lars Nooden wrote at 2013-04-19 10:35 -0500:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:00 PM, alberto fuentes paj...@gmail.com wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make a direct connection between A and B with ssh, you need to have at
least on of them be publicly
green wrote:
Lars Nooden wrote:
alberto fuentes wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make a direct connection between A and B with ssh, you need to have at
least on of them be publicly available even if the other is blocked behind
a firewall.
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013, green wrote:
Lars Nooden wrote at 2013-04-19 10:35 -0500:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:00 PM, alberto fuentes paj...@gmail.com wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make a direct connection between A and B with ssh, you need to have
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com wrote:
alberto fuentes wrote:
A (me) - Server (overseas) - B (arbitrary computer in my city)
To make it a little more clear. Both computer A and B know about Server.
Right now I use openvpn to bring all the computers together
the machine back up I will
try it and report back ;)
Both computer A and B know about Server.
If both A and B can get to Server then it is very easy to just hop
through Server to get to the other.
The server is just a convenience since both machines are behind firewalls,
but I would like to avoid
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:29 PM, alberto fuentes paj...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually I got the idea from filetea [0]
I just checked it out. Its less magical than I thought. It *does* use the
server to route all packets :(
That looks like you have to somehow be logged into both hosts and run
nat-traverse on each. But it looks interesting.
Firewalls can track and block UDP (create state) even if it is a
stateless protocol too, so you may have to have control of the gateways
too
Its a long shot because i can really picture how could it work
I know I can connect using the third server, but I just want to use the
server to establish the connection
Any ideas :)
alberto fuentes wrote:
Subject: connect directly to another computer bypassing firewalls
using a third server
Its a long shot because i can really picture how could it work
I know I can connect using the third server, but I just want to use the
server to establish the connection
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com wrote:
alberto fuentes wrote:
Subject: connect directly to another computer bypassing firewalls
using a third server
Its a long shot because i can really picture how could it work
I know I can connect using the third server
alberto fuentes wrote:
That way all the packages would be forwarded via the server.
The server is overseas. Im trying to connect to a computer in my city.
Packages have to travel and comeback. I was hoping some kind of magic that
would allow me to use the server overseas *just* to establish
alberto fuentes wrote at 2013-04-18 16:18 -0500:
Its a long shot because i can really picture how could it work
I know I can connect using the third server, but I just want to use the
server to establish the connection
Perhaps the nat-traverse package is of interest to you.
signature.asc
On 11/29/2012 12:21 AM, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Hello,
Matej Kosik a écrit :
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
- when I change source IP address from whatever it was to,
On 11/28/2012 12:04 PM, Darac Marjal wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:54:04AM +, Matej Kosik wrote:
Hi,
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
- when I change source IP
Matej Kosik a écrit :
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
I have discovered the following regularity:
- if source IP address in given pcap is one of my IP addresses,
then
Hi,
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
- when I change source IP address from whatever it was to, e.g.,
10.0.10.6, 10.0.10.7 etc,
then when I try to replay the modified pcap
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:54:04AM +, Matej Kosik wrote:
Hi,
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
- when I change source IP address from whatever it was to, e.g.,
On Mi, 28 nov 12, 11:54:04, Matej Kosik wrote:
The only thing which could be causing thing I was aware of was
iptables. However, when I apt-get removed it, nothing changed.
iptables is just the tool to make changes to the kernel firewall. If you
suspect troubles due to the firewall you are
Hello,
Matej Kosik a écrit :
I am experiencing some deterministic packet drop:
- when I tcpreplay on lo some pcap (0.pcap) file,
that traffic does not reach listening applications
- when I change source IP address from whatever it was to, e.g.,
10.0.10.6, 10.0.10.7 etc,
Why these
...@gusl.org.ve
escribió:
Mensaje original
De: Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Para: Debian User Spanish [Debian User Spanish debian-user-
span...@lists.debian.org]
Enviado el: Viernes 18 Septiembre 2009 a las 5:50 PMh
Asunto: [OT] Firewalls
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero
Para: Debian User Spanish [Debian User Spanish debian-user-
span...@lists.debian.org]
Enviado el: Viernes 18 Septiembre 2009 a las 5:50 PMh
Asunto: [OT] Firewalls
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
servidor de aplicaciones como
firewall, pero leyendo
-
span...@lists.debian.org]
Enviado el: Viernes 18 Septiembre 2009 a las 5:50 PMh
Asunto: [OT] Firewalls
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
servidor de aplicaciones como
firewall, pero leyendo veo que es mejor tener una maquina independiente
como fw
Si tienes
HOla gente
Aqui otro tema para discutir sobre firewalls.
¿Es mejor tener un firewall instalado en un ordenador solo con el
firewall o implementarlo en
nuestro servidor de aplicaciones?
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
servidor de aplicaciones como
firewall, pero
Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto escribió:
HOla gente
Aqui otro tema para discutir sobre firewalls.
¿Es mejor tener un firewall instalado en un ordenador solo con el
firewall o implementarlo en
nuestro servidor de aplicaciones?
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
Mensaje original
De: Carlos Eduardo Sotelo Pinto
Para: Debian User Spanish [Debian User Spanish debian-user-
span...@lists.debian.org]
Enviado el: Viernes 18 Septiembre 2009 a las 5:50 PMh
Asunto: [OT] Firewalls
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
: [OT] Firewalls
Aqui no tengo una opinion, pero si lo que yo hago, que es usar mi
servidor de aplicaciones como
firewall, pero leyendo veo que es mejor tener una maquina
independiente
como fw
Si tienes $$ para tener otro hierro (igual un pc con bajos
recursos te
sirve perfectamente
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 10:15:32AM -0700, PETER EASTHOPE wrote:
Folk,
I've installed openvpn on two systems and tried some
configurations including Example 2 from the man page.
For those without access to the man page: Uses an UDP tunnel with static
key security.
Seems that firewalls
that your software
will become a necessity in many environments.
kj ... any holes in the firewalls for UDP?
Not that I know of. Is there an efficient reliable
way to search for a UDP port?
kj Since the firewalls allow SSH through, you can
always run a PPP link over ssh...
Will keep it in mind
On Jul 19, 2007, at 9:16 AM, PETER EASTHOPE wrote:
The socket concept is sound. Yet where administrators
insist on closing ports etc. indiscriminately, the
concept is defeated. I'm afraid that your software
will become a necessity in many environments.
I don't know what sort of environment
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:16:42 -0700
PETER EASTHOPE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Not that I know of. Is there an efficient reliable
way to search for a UDP port?
Nmap scans UDP ports with the -sU option.
[snip]
Celejar
--
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP)
Folk,
I've installed openvpn on two systems and tried some
configurations including Example 2 from the man page.
Seems that firewalls block successfully (sarcasm).
Nevertheless, http, ssh, ftp and a few other protocols
work.
Is there any chance of using one of the open ports for
the tunnel
On Jul 18, 2007, at 10:15 AM, PETER EASTHOPE wrote:
Folk,
I've installed openvpn on two systems and tried some
configurations including Example 2 from the man page.
Seems that firewalls block successfully (sarcasm).
Nevertheless, http, ssh, ftp and a few other protocols
work.
If you control
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 10:57:10AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:
On Jul 18, 2007, at 10:15 AM, PETER EASTHOPE wrote:
Folk,
I've installed openvpn on two systems and tried some
configurations including Example 2 from the man page.
Seems that firewalls block successfully (sarcasm
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:38:32AM +, Michael Fothergill wrote:
What I would say is that there is never a precise one to one match between
what is in a manual and what you need to do to use a piece of software.
If you can't do it without the software you won't be able to with the
From: P. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: firewalls and installation stuff
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:12:58 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 03:37:19PM -0700, P. Johnson wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct
Dear Debian folks,
I have now got Debian Sarge 3.1 r3 up and running on my 1200MHz AMD Duron
machine with two hard drives of 20 and 40 GB and a 15 inch cheap Belinea
monitor.
I also have a broadband connection and the 15 CD set of official Sarge
stuff.
I installed the base system plus
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 12:21:40PM +, Michael Fothergill wrote:
Dear Debian folks,
[...]
Would that have been enough to include and fire up some kind of firewall or
do I need to install that separately?
linux has a built in firewall in the kernel. commonly called
Netfilter and
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
And don't take this personally, but as a piece of friendly
[...]
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
I hope that didn't come across as harsh as it now looks to me.
A
signature.asc
Description: Digital
On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 12:21 +, Michael Fothergill wrote:
Dear Debian folks,
[...]
The broadband connection and my browser work fine.
Would that have been enough to include and fire up some kind of firewall or
do I need to install that separately?
If so what firewall would you
From: Andrew Sackville-West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: firewalls and installation stuff
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:43:05 -0700
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
And don't take this personally, but as a piece
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 04:26:41PM +, Michael Fothergill wrote:
From: Andrew Sackville-West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: firewalls and installation stuff
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:43:05 -0700
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew
On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 12:21 +, Michael Fothergill wrote:
Would that have been enough to include and fire up some kind of firewall or
do I need to install that separately?
If so what firewall would you recommend and what aptitude command will fetch
me it?
How do I know that the
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
And don't take this personally, but as a piece of friendly
[...]
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
I hope that didn't come across as harsh as it now looks to me.
It
trying
to be an operating system.
Would that have been enough to include and fire up some kind of firewall
or do I need to install that separately?
Not needed. People use Debian to create firewalls. Just don't install any
software that you don't need and you'll be OK. aptitude visualizes
Michael Fothergill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would that have been enough to include and fire up some kind of
firewall or do I need to install that separately?
If so what firewall would you recommend and what aptitude command will
fetch me it?
How do I know that the firewall is on and
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 03:37:19PM -0700, P. Johnson wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
And don't take this personally, but as a piece of friendly
[...]
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
I
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 03:37:19PM -0700, P. Johnson wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:08:33AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
And don't take this personally, but as a piece of friendly
[...]
Clyde Wilson wrote:
When I run shieldsup at grc.com it says my firewall
sucks. I would like to plug obvious leaks in my home
system...
I for one would not trust Shields Up. Firstly I believe it is targeted
at MS OS's and secondly I wouldn't even trust it for that as it only
scans a few
Brett writes:
I for one would not trust Shields Up. Firstly I believe it is targeted
at MS OS's and secondly I wouldn't even trust it for that as it only
scans a few (well known) ports (IIRC).
It just runs Nmap. You can choose to have it scan all ports. Ignore his
silly nonsense about
How about 'Firestarter' if using something Gui based is not a problem
for you. It's simple and efficient for a single machine and sort of
reminds me of early ZoneAlarm back in the Win98 days (but without the
yellow!).
Good enough for a home computer if you are not running a server or have
more
So what happens if you can use debian but can't use any G.U.I. since none
of the G.U.I. will talk yet? Is there a console equivalent for guardog?
I'm totally blind and when I use a debian equipped computer I do it alone.
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Clyde Wilson wrote:
Thanks Chris, great tip!
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 03:00:11AM -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
So what happens if you can use debian but can't use any G.U.I. since none
of the G.U.I. will talk yet? Is there a console equivalent for guardog?
I'm totally blind and when I use a debian equipped computer I do it alone.
snip
You can try Shorewall, that's console based and if you've setup webmin you
can also manage it using a webinterface.
If you are more in to colors you can have fwbuilder... It's a gui based
firewall configurator that compiles shellscripts that setup iptables.
Nice thing about fwbuilder is that you
I had tried setting up webmine in the past and couldn't get the setup
working completely. I think that may have been because I wasn't using a
java browser to talk to it then. Thanks much for these firewall
suggestions.
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Bart van den Heuvel wrote:
You can try
Hmmm... Webmin is pretty easy to setup :-)
Should be as easy as:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /tmp]# gunzip webmin-1.260.tar.gz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /tmp]# tar xf webmin-1.260.tar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /tmp]# cd webmin-1.260
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /tmp/webmin-1.260]# ./setup.sh /usr/local/webmin
And you don't need any
Jude DaShiell writes:
So what happens if you can use debian but can't use any G.U.I. since none
of the G.U.I. will talk yet? Is there a console equivalent for guardog?
I'm totally blind and when I use a debian equipped computer I do it
alone.
I like Ipmasq. No GUI.
--
John Hasler
--
To
/usr/sbin/iptables(sorry - couldn´t resist ;-)but seriously ... wirte your own iptables script.This ensures you know what your firewall is doing and probably you will learn something that way, too.I tried about 10 different guis and prebuilt scripts before i started to write my own skript.
After
Jude DaShiell wrote:
So what happens if you can use debian but can't use any G.U.I. since
none of the G.U.I. will talk yet? Is there a console equivalent for
guardog? I'm totally blind and when I use a debian equipped computer I
do it alone.
I'm a bit surprized not to see someone mention
That looks easier, when I tried it was a few years ago and I had to use a
port something in the 10,000's range to talk to it. That was on redhat
too before I found out how to install debian.
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006, Bart van den Heuvel wrote:
Hmmm... Webmin is pretty easy to setup :-)
Should
s, but that's a different matter entirely- firewalls don't generally fix these issues. I guess you should post more about what you are trying to acheive.-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the help Neil. You have given me some things to look into.Neil Dugan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clyde Wilson wrote: When I run "shieldsup" at grc.com it says my firewall sucks. I would like to plug obvious leaks in my home system... If you are using a broadband connection then what
Clyde Wilson writes:
When I run shieldsup at grc.com it says my firewall sucks.
What does it actually say? Shieldsup is a convenient way to run Nmap
remotely, but they make some silly recommendations.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Thanks for your time John. I'm away from my Linux system right now, but I'll try to gen up some messages when I get back to it...John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clyde Wilson writes: When I run "shieldsup" at grc.com it says my firewall sucks.What does it actually say? Shieldsup is a
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
If you are talking about a personal firewall for your PC, have alook at
Guarddog. It configures IPtables, so you only need to run it to
configure or reconfigure
into machines
with stupid operating systems via stupid browsers accessing
hostile websites or stupid operating systems with e-mail clients
that auto-open hostile attachments, but that's a different matter
entirely- firewalls don't generally fix these issues.
I guess you should post more about what you
http://www.shorewall.net/
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
darwin wrote:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
For an enduser box, Firestarter is good, and simple to configure for a
new user.
Already packaged for Debian.
Regards.
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend an easy but fairly
good firewall?
darwin writes:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Which he can install it with 'apt-get install shorewall'.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Thank you for your help!
--- Katipo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
darwin wrote:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone
recommend an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
For an enduser box, Firestarter is good, and
Thanks for the tip, John
--- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend
an easy but fairly
good firewall?
darwin writes:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Which he can install it with 'apt-get install
shorewall'.
--
John
--- darwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend
an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Thanks for the tip Darwin
--- darwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.shorewall.net/
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend
an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
systems with
e-mail clients
that auto-open hostile attachments, but that's a
different matter
entirely- firewalls don't generally fix these
issues.
I guess you should post more about what you are
trying to
acheive.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Thanks Chris, great tip! I'll give it a try.
--- Chris Lale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clyde Wilson wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend
an easy but fairly
good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
If you are talking about a personal firewall for
your PC, have alook
Thanks David, I appreciate the tip.
--- David Koski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 27 February 2006 06:37 pm, Clyde Wilson
wrote:
I'm on Debian Sarge 3.1 r 1. Can anyone recommend
an easy but fairly good firewall?
Thanks for your time!
Do you mean a dedicated firewall? IPcop has
Thanks Anthony. I'll give guarddog a try!
--- Anthony Simonelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have a Desktop Environment like KDE, I would
recommend Guarddog. If
you have Gnome as a Desktop Environment, I recommend
Firestater. If no D.E.
then Shorewall.
On Monday 27 February 2006
.
These devices don't prevent spyware/viruses coming
into machines
with stupid operating systems via stupid browsers
accessing
hostile websites or stupid operating systems with
e-mail clients
that auto-open hostile attachments, but that's a
different matter
entirely- firewalls don't
1 - 100 of 264 matches
Mail list logo
