Re: [leaf-user] Re: re sh-httpd perm Bug

2002-07-30 Thread Eric Wolzak
Of course weblet is still doing something I consider wrong -- it's saying the firewall is in red light / ERROR mode just because it has 251 denied or rejected packets. Isn't this the whole point of a firewall, to deny and reject those packets? How is this an ERROR? At worst, it should be

Re: [leaf-user] Re: re sh-httpd perm Bug

2002-07-30 Thread Julian Church
Hi Dan At 00:07 30/07/02 -0700, Dan Harkless wrote: Of course weblet is still doing something I consider wrong -- it's saying the firewall is in red light / ERROR mode just because it has 251 denied or rejected packets. Isn't this the whole point of a firewall, to deny and reject those

Re: [leaf-user] Re: re sh-httpd perm Bug

2002-07-30 Thread Dan Harkless
Eric Wolzak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Of course weblet is still doing something I consider wrong -- it's saying the firewall is in red light / ERROR mode just because it has 251 denied or rejected packets. Isn't this the whole point of a firewall, to deny and reject those packets? How

Re: [leaf-user] Re: re sh-httpd perm Bug

2002-07-30 Thread Dan Harkless
Julian Church [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's also the possibility that the bulk of those packets are from one or two harmless sources that you don't really need to worry about - it's common for cable/ADSL systems to spew forth all sorts of stuff of this type. If this is the case it