From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org  Sat Oct 14 09:13:18 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09BB7E4249D
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:13:18 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBE4669D4A
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:13:17 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v9E9DHMj084568
 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:13:17 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 222997] security/py-fail2ban upgrade to 0.10.0 will break pf
 rules on system
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:13:18 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages
X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s)
X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People
X-Bugzilla-Who: theis@gmx.at
X-Bugzilla-Status: New
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback?
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-222997-13-a755DOP1wt@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-222997-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-222997-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ports bug reports <freebsd-ports-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:13:18 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D222997

--- Comment #1 from theis@gmx.at ---
I don't use pf so I can't confirm that what I write below does the fix:

When 0.10 came out there was a discussion on GitHub about fail2ban deleting=
 the
rules of pf. The problem is that the definition of the action has changed, I
added a warning about that to the installation message:

In jails, it is no longer sufficient to write
action =3D pf

You need to specify a  port (or port range) and name, e.g
action   =3D pf[port=3D{80 443}, name=3Dhttp]

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=