which did not support ARM CPUs.
In the mean time, pfsense bases on FreeBSD 10.1, which AFAIK introduced
support for ARM.
So how about running pfSense on the R1; any updates?
Cheers
Thinker Rix
--
*Thinker Rix*, an internet user.
Please avoid TOFU in newsgroups and mailing lists
(https://en.wik
Hi,
I own a hard copy of the pfSense book by Chris and Jim and have two
questions about it:
1. As a buyer of the hard copy, am I eligible to receive a gratis
PDF-version of the book, too?
2. Is there any ETA for the hard copy version of the new edition?
Thanks
Thinker Rix
--
*Thinker Rix
Hi Volker,
Thank you for your time!
On 2014-04-13 14:09, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
On Sun 13 Apr 2014 22:11:41 NZST +1200, Thinker Rix wrote:
I own a hard copy of the pfSense book by Chris and Jim and have two
questions about it:
1. As a buyer of the hard copy, am I eligible to receive
.
I think you should audit your security policy.
Regards
Thinker Rix
--
*Thinker Rix*, an internet user.
Please avoid TOFU in newsgroups and mailing lists
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting)
Bitte vermeidet TOFU in Newsgroups und Mailing-Listen
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki
the 4+ NICs configured
as separate zones.. (e.g. WAN, LAN, DMZ, WLAN)
--
*Thinker Rix*, an internet user.
Please avoid TOFU in newsgroups and mailing lists
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting)
Bitte vermeidet TOFU in Newsgroups und Mailing-Listen
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki
such a board one day with at least 4-8 NICs.
--
*Thinker Rix*, an internet user.
Please avoid TOFU in newsgroups and mailing lists
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting)
Bitte vermeidet TOFU in Newsgroups und Mailing-Listen
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOFU
Dear all,
Firewall: Aliases: IP
=
I have had entered some domain names there in the past, which always
worked flawlessly.
Recently I changed ISP and since then the domain names are not resolved
anymore to IPs, so that the traffic using those aliases gets blocked by
the
Dear all,
Firewall: Aliases: IP
=
I have had entered some domain names there in the past, which always
worked flawlessly.
Recently I changed ISP and since then the domain names are not resolved
anymore to IPs, so that the traffic using those aliases gets blocked by
the
On 2014-02-14 17:57, Chris Bagnall wrote:
On 14/2/14 3:37 pm, Thinker Rix wrote:
I have had entered some domain names there in the past, which always
worked flawlessly.
Recently I changed ISP and since then the domain names are not resolved
anymore to IPs, so that the traffic using those
On 2014-02-14 18:51, Chris Bagnall wrote:
On 14/2/14 4:48 pm, Thinker Rix wrote:
Any ideas what could be the problem?
Have you tried entering the DNS servers your ISP supplies via PPP or
DHCP (look on the Status - Interfaces page, they should be listed on
there) manually on the General
is good, but always out of date. If not found on the list,
but somethign similar is on it, then definitely ask.
Ok!
Thank you
Best regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-11-06 15:22, Vick Khera wrote:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com
mailto:thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Would pfSense use this CPU instructions so to
hardware-encrypt/decrypt all VPN traffic (openVPN)?
Woud pfSense benefit from
performance testing for AES-NI on pfSense.
There are reports that FreeBSD doesn't support AES-NI very well.
Thank you for this information, Jim. So I figure, that buying the Xeon
just for it's AES functions would (currently) be a waste of money.
Best regards
Thinker Rix
where I could look up, which chipsets FreeBSD supports and from what
version on?
Best regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
waste of money
in my case?
Best regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-24 19:30, Thinker Rix wrote:
I am planning a new pfSense box and am wondering if the hardware that
I want to use will be sufficient.
Hardware:
2x Intel PRO/1000 PT Quad Port Gigabit NICs, each directly connected
via PCIe-8x to the North Bridge of the CPU
4x
3.1 GHz 3.5 GHz
The Xeon has hardware support for AES encryption that might speed
up VPN traffic?
Which of the CPUs do you advise me to pick?
Thanks for any feedback,
best regards
Thinker Rix
I don't see a Core i5 on that list. See if you can get one of those.
It'll
regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
? Or is it just a compromise that they do by weighting costs and
risk and deciding to take the risk? As I have a RAID controller and
disks on stock I could use them without any cost.
Kind regards,
Chris
Thanks for your help!
Kind regards
Thinker Rix
On 2013-10-09 19:38, Jim Thompson wrote:
So asking the question is stupid
On 2013-10-09 19:50, Jim Thompson wrote:
IMO, this bullshit thread only serves to assist those asking the
question in stroking their own ego.
On 2013-10-12 01:40, Jim Thompson wrote:
Otherwise: get off my lawn.
I'm
the guide myself? Otherwise maybe someone
with writing rights to the CMS wants to update the manual.
Cheers
Thinker Rix
P.S. Maybe an update to this page would be convenient, too:
https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Can_I_upgrade_my_pfSense_through_the_web_interface%3F
traffic for discovery purposes
from the authorities. The best part of this, it is paid for by the
customers, since the ISP needs to pay for the system and storage.
Yes, but see above.
Regards,
Seth
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List
. But that would kill the project probably.
I am not sure that I understand what you mean. Is it what you want to
say: In the case that the security software that you use gets
infiltrated, you would prefer not learning about this fact, but just
continue using it?
Greetings
Thinker Rix
and force them to do things they don't like. We all - as a community -
should think and act pro-actively to that and take appropriate measures
to protect pfSense, ESF and the key people such as Chris Buechler and
his partners from this realistic thread in time.
Best regards
Thinker Rix
, it
is not owned by anybody.
So summarizing:
If pfSense would be incorporated as a foundation at some place (many
countries would be possible) outside the USA, it could be a solution to
this I guess.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List
On 2013-10-11 21:20, Walter Parker wrote:
Who would you trust more that ESF? Why,specifically, would you trust
another group of people to be more trustworthy?
The point is not untrusting ESF or anybody else. The point is that ESF
is based in the USA, a country where the current government can
properly (how about view
threaded mode..) , instead of blaming others to bore you.
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-10 01:27, Robison, Dave wrote:
On 10/09/2013 15:20, Joe Landman wrote:
I just worked out setting up new filters for the recent S/N destroying, high
tin-foil-hat content, on gmail. Since people pleading for this to go away
hasn't worked, technological measures to restore S/N for my
a majority.
And by the way, I am a member of this list for quite a while.
*This list is NOT a place where anyone is welcome to barge in and tell
people the proper way of using it.*
Exactly. How about you follow your own advice?
Thinker Rix
___
List
Hi Giles
On 2013-10-10 12:39, Giles Coochey wrote:
On 10/10/2013 09:38, Thinker Rix wrote:
On 2013-10-10 01:13, Przemysław Pawełczyk wrote:
On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:05:22 +0300
Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Well, actually I started this thread with a pretty frank,
straight
reader. Hint: Threaded mode.
Cheers
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
is clearly about discussing pfsense, therefore it is
on-topic, I could equally take the stance, take your technical
discussions to the dev list, however I am not the type of exclusive
close-minded minded person that you appear to be. Please stop
hijacking this thread.
FACK!!
Regards
Thinker Rix
at this very moment* to a discussion thread that
is of more interest for you and there you go!
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
your posting to his thread, not to have
2 concurrent threads - und thus concurrent discussions - about the same
topic.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Hi Warren,
thank you for your quick reply!
On 2013-10-10 18:39, Warren Baker wrote:
On 10 Oct 2013 17:36, Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com
mailto:thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hi all!
I want to upgrade from 2.0.1 to 2.1 and am wondering which
FreeBSD-version 2.1 is based on, since
On 2013-10-10 18:54, Jim Pingle wrote:
On 10/10/2013 11:35 AM, Thinker Rix wrote:
Is there someone who knows wich version of FreeBSD 2.1 is based on?
8.3-RELEASE-p11
It was going to be 8.3 the TBD part was for the patchlevel. It ended up
being -p11 by the time 2.1 was released.
Thank you
correctly, but
have text on top - full quote below which is a no-go in newsgroups and
mailing lists...
Cheers,
Paul.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-10 19:25, Jim Pingle wrote:
comprehensive explanation help
Thank you very much, Jim!
Best regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Dear pfsense-team,
today I posted the following on your blog at http://blog.pfsense.org/?p=712
Worried User Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
October 9th, 2013 at 7:55 am
Hi guys,
I want to ask if you have been approached by any US
with the fact that they very well bother knocking the
doors of small businesses with niche products, I guess my question is
quite legitimate!
Greetings
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-09 19:03, Jim Thompson wrote:
(TIC mode: on)
Sorry, but I guess the whole matter - not only concerning pfSense, but
the current threat to our civilization by our criminal governments as a
whole - is much too serious for any TIC-modes..
On 2013-10-09 19:03, Jim Thompson wrote:
(TIC mode: on)
Sorry, but I guess the whole matter - not only concerning pfSense, but
the current threat to our civilization by our criminal governments as a
whole - is much too serious for any TIC-modes..
be a chance to get an official statement
of ESF, maybe without any ifs and buts?
This would really help in this uncertain times that we all have to
suffer currently.
Thank you,
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http
question?
Thank you
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Hi Adam,
On 2013-10-09 19:42, Adam Thompson wrote:
Which makes asking the question quite irrelevant.
I do not think so.
Greetings
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
not want to sue or otherwise harm anybody.
I only asked a very simple question and now read the answers. Very
interesting answers, I think.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo
On 2013-10-09 17:20, Thinker Rix wrote:
Dear pfsense-team,
I want to ask if you have been approached by any US government
officials, such as NSA, FBI, etc. and been asked/ forced to include
any backdoors, spyware, loggers, etc. into pfsense and if you did so.
Hello all!
Thank you for all
if it is secure is
obnoxious? I think it is the most important question of all.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-09 20:22, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Oct 9, 2013, at 7:13 PM, Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hello Jim!
On 2013-10-09 19:50, Jim Thompson wrote:
IMO, this bullshit thread only serves to assist those asking the question in
stroking their own ego.
This is already
that...
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-09 20:18, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Oct 9, 2013, at 7:03 PM, Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hello Jim!
Thank you for your answer.
On 2013-10-09 19:38, Jim Thompson wrote:
No, the NSA hasn’t approached us about pfSense, or adding a “back door”, or
anything similar. Nor
, that in reality is not
really encrypted anymore; but he chose to stand up and blow the whistle.
Great guy.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
On 2013-10-09 20:16, Gé Weijers wrote:
I think it's unlikely that ESF was even asked to cooperate, but I
don't believe a denial is all that useful under the circumstances, and
asking for it again and again is obnoxious.
Having thought about it again and again, I would like to feedback to you
as i like to
- I still don't know what to do with the answer
- I have no plan
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
the effect described at the beginning of my email
(these are called trolls).
What trouble do you refer to? I only read some aggressive/ snappy
answers which - frankly - I find pretty awkward reactions to my simple
question.
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List
not because you are bored about what they discuss is not
really a solution :-)
A reader that is capable of threaded view mode is e.g. Mozilla
Thunderbird (View Sort by Threaded)
Regards
Thinker Rix
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http
On 2013-02-23 09:42, Chris Buechler wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Thinker Rix thinke...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hello,
there is a bug in the backup/restore function of pfSense 2.0.2 which makes
it impossible to restore encrypted backups, rendering those backups useless.
Thanks
Hello,
there is a bug in the backup/restore function of pfSense 2.0.2 which
makes it impossible to restore encrypted backups, rendering those
backups useless.
==
You can easily reproduce the bug by making a backup with the following
settings:
- Backup
58 matches
Mail list logo
