From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 31 18:26:25 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C015F16A41C for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 18:26:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable-local@be-well.no-ip.com) Received: from mail21.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail21.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.23]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8773E43D1F for ; Tue, 31 May 2005 18:26:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable-local@be-well.no-ip.com) Received: (qmail 27335 invoked from network); 31 May 2005 18:26:25 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail21.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 31 May 2005 18:26:24 -0000 Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id 53B0530; Tue, 31 May 2005 14:26:24 -0400 (EDT) Sender: lowell@be-well.ilk.org To: stable@freebsd.org References: <200505311631.j4VGVo5i027356@lurza.secnetix.de> <441x7ns2lq.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 31 May 2005 14:26:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <441x7ns2lq.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Message-ID: <44ekbnb6b4.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Lines: 16 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Subject: Re: IP Firewalling by DNS name X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 18:26:25 -0000 Lowell Gilbert writes: > Oliver Fromme writes: > > > I assume he's not using inetd(8) for ssh (which is not a > > good ide ain general, and it's not the default anyway). > > Note that sshd(8) supports hosts_access(3) directly without > > the help of inetd(8). > > I thought someone had specified inetd, but looking again, that seems > to have been my own hallucination. Sorry about that. I figured out what it was. Someone had asked why hosts.allow warns against wrapping sshd. I remembered that the file comment giving the warning had originally been added when hosts.allow was an inetd-only configuration...