Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-09 Thread Matthew Paul Thomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 HSO wrote on 08/02/12 09:02: 2012/2/7, Jordon Bedwell jor...@envygeeks.com: Stop throwing around privacy like there is some big security flaw in Linux, there are tools that do what everyone wants, it seems to me that nobody is willing to even

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-08 Thread HSO
All you talk about it's planed - some of programed some of in progress. Look at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Networking 2012/2/7, Jordon Bedwell jor...@envygeeks.com: Stop throwing around privacy like there is some big security flaw in Linux, there are tools that do what everyone wants, it seems to

RE: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-08 Thread nick rundy
An application that merges apparmor and iptables (as a wrapper) would be fantastic! add a GUI to it that helps newbies use it and problem solved. Perhaps Canonical could create such an application as part of their ongoing work with apparmor? On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Jason Todd

RE: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-08 Thread nick rundy
The Network-Enhancement-Spec does NOT solve the problem of IPTables no longer supporting rules by executables. Is blocking outgoing connections at all useful enough to show at the top level like this? = user is not in a position to make an informed decision on whether the application

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-08 Thread Dane Mutters
Stop throwing around privacy like there is some big security flaw in Linux, there are tools that do what everyone wants, it seems to me that nobody is willing to even look or everybody is fed baby food, what is the point of being on Linux if you aren't going to use the terminal for what it's

RE: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-07 Thread Jason Todd
Both MAC and Windows have applications for protecting users privacy regarding outgoing internet connections. Control over outgoing internet connections is a huge privacy area that is non-existent in ubuntu. Here's a great little program for Apple MACs:

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-02-07 Thread Jordon Bedwell
Stop throwing around privacy like there is some big security flaw in Linux, there are tools that do what everyone wants, it seems to me that nobody is willing to even look or everybody is fed baby food, what is the point of being on Linux if you aren't going to use the terminal for what it's there

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-01-29 Thread Robbie Williamson
Sounds like nethogs can solve the problem of knowing which processes are currently sucking down bandwidth. As for your indicator idea, I think a simple GUI front-end to nethogs would be the first step. The application could reside with other system apps, and simply be fired up when a user wants

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-01-29 Thread Matthew Paul Thomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robbie Williamson wrote on 29/01/12 21:39: On 01/26/2012 11:12 PM, nick rundy wrote: ... Just to be clear, I'm not asking that an application-firewall (as Jason Todd was speaking of) be created to solve this problem. I'm totally fine with a

Re: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-01-29 Thread HSO
2012/1/30, HSO a...@biznes.linux.pl: Firewall in to Network Manager NetHogs allgo. form source code in to System Monitor, code For me - Cool :-) Firewall - iptables + Some of part of code fwbuilder can be use ? -- powiedz mi, a zapomnę, pokaż -- a zapamiętam, pozwól mi działać, a

RE: can we find a solution to bug #820895 (show Process Name in log files) (imaginative solution/description presented)?

2012-01-26 Thread nick rundy
Yes, good insights, Robbie. Just to be clear, I'm not asking that an application-firewall (as Jason Todd was speaking of) be created to solve this problem. I'm totally fine with a solution that doesn't involve a firewall. It's just that an application firewall allows me to solve this