From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 14 16:49:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 723B716A4E0 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:49:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fb-pf@psconsult.nl) Received: from ps226.psconsult.nl (ps226.psconsult.nl [213.222.19.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7B843D58 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:49:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from fb-pf@psconsult.nl) Received: from phuket.psconsult.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phuket.psconsult.nl (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k6EFlTMF008746 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:47:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from fb-pf@psconsult.nl) Received: (from paul@localhost) by phuket.psconsult.nl (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id k6EFlTdI008745 for freebsd-pf@freebsd.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:47:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from fb-pf@psconsult.nl) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:47:29 +0200 From: Paul Schenkeveld To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060714154729.GA8616@psconsult.nl> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org References: <44B7715E.8050906@suutari.iki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44B7715E.8050906@suutari.iki.fi> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: Any ongoing effort to port /etc/rc.d/pf_boot, /etc/pf.boot.conf from NetBSD ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 16:49:49 -0000 Hello, On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:26:38PM +0300, Ari Suutari wrote: > Hi, > > Does anyone know if there are any plans to bring > pf boot-time protection (ie. /etc/rc.d/pf_boot and > related config files) from NetBSD to FreeBSD ? > > This would close small (but as far as I understand existing) > window during boot where firewall is fully open (if using only > pf). I'd prefer to have PF_DEFAULT_BLOCK analogous to IPFILTER_DEFAULT_BLOCK instead of some magic script closing the hole between driver init and configuration. Always wondered how the OpenBSD -securety minded- people have come up with a packet filter that's open by default. Or am I missing the point here? Regards, Paul Schenkeveld