From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Nov 27 08:57:05 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E5E4A24D9 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:57:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cj7mK30yHz4nKb for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:57:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.94 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZYp-000EeE-Ld for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:56:59 +0100 Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:56:59 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: firewall choice Message-ID: <20201127085659.GC74574@home.opsec.eu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Cj7mK30yHz4nKb X-Spamd-Bar: / X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:12502, ipnet:2001:14f8::/32, country:DE] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:57:05 -0000 Hi! > What's the "best" [1] choice for firewalling these days, in the list's opinion? At work, we use pf for complex setups, editing the rules using fwbuilder, and ipfw for the simple setups and the quick blocks... -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 Now what ?