On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 08:21, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
Dave Ihnat wrote:
Relying on the infallibility of your software and administration as your
only defense is [...] naive and dangerous.
Amen.
Why someone would choose to deprecate a tool which does no harm and
provides an ADDITIONAL layer
Dave Ihnat wrote:
Relying on the infallibility of your software and administration as your
only defense is, to be blunt--and I have been in these posts, far more
than I usually am, because I'm quite worried that someone will believe
your approach--naieve and dangerous.
I agree. Anyone who
On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 22:59, Budi Febrianto wrote:
I'm playing around with RHL 8 to set up firewall with iptables.
With Pentium II 300, 64 MB, 4 GB SCSI HD, 2 NIC's 100 Mbps. I think it
enough.
Enough if you use text mode. I run a good firewall on a Pentium/166 with
64 MB, a 1GB EIDE disk, and
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Budi Febrianto wrote:
What are the different if I using RHL 8 as firewall, rather than using
pre-built firewall. They say that the pre-built firewall come with
hardened operating system, I think Linux already did.
A packet filter is a packet filter. Some of the commercial
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Kent Borg wrote:
These days Red Hat ships quite secure. Keep it up to date, use good
Oh, come on...is this a troll? I usually have to spend a whole day
installing a Red Hat box: an hour or two for the install, and the rest of
the day locking down the default configuration.
A good choice is to use firewall builder and leaf.
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
http://www.fwbuilder.org/
it may help you
raymundo
Budi Febrianto wrote:
Hi,
Management urgently push me to implement firewall in our system.
Yes... we do not have firewall.
I'm playing around with RHL 8 to set
