On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Jack Bowling wrote:
> And I do advise everybody to set up a firewall. I am startled by
> the amount of snooping and scanning going on out there. Last night
> I even had one bozo try to get in on port 1 tcpmux as shown in the
> following hitlist entry. I did a hostname lookup o
** Reply to message from "John D. Hardin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on
Sun, 1 Oct 2000 08:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Jack Bowling wrote:
>
> > However, having said that, I still feel that it is not in my best
> > interests to have the firewall sitting on my production box.
>
> Reverse
Jack Bowling wrote:
>
> I am assuming that the downstream instance of ipchains rulesets is
> independent
> of the upstream ones. Am I overlooking something here, or am I just out
> of luck?
>
> Jack
Jack,
I am not sure what you are looking for. If the firewall on the 486 is
filtering packets t
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Jack Bowling wrote:
> ** This was also posted to comp.os.linux.networking **
>
> I have recently fallen in love with the interactive dynamic firewall
> capabilites of the Firestarter firewall app for Gnome-enabled linux
> boxes. You can block everything (and it does this per
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Jack Bowling wrote:
> However, having said that, I still feel that it is not in my best
> interests to have the firewall sitting on my production box.
Reverse that thought and you'll be correct: "it is not in my best
interests to have my production box be the firewall."
It
** This was also posted to comp.os.linux.networking **
I have recently fallen in love with the interactive dynamic firewall
capabilites of the Firestarter firewall app for Gnome-enabled linux
boxes. You can block everything (and it does this perfectly as
tested at www.grc.com) and then watch the
