From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jan 28 5:56:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.cc (gw.nectar.cc [208.42.49.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C222937B402 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 05:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from madman.nectar.cc (madman.nectar.cc [10.0.1.111]) by gw.nectar.cc (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E5434; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:56:44 -0600 (CST) Received: (from nectar@localhost) by madman.nectar.cc (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g0SDuhf38457; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:56:43 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from nectar) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 07:56:43 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Cliff Sarginson Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Firewall config non-intuitiveness Message-ID: <20020128135643.GH33952@madman.nectar.cc> References: <20020127220923.B1494@shell.gsinet.sittig.org> <20020127134511.Q81780-100000@rockstar.stealthgeeks.net> <20020128064925.GA1180@raggedclown.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020128064925.GA1180@raggedclown.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-Url: http://www.nectar.cc/ Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 07:49:25AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson wrote: > On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 02:50:50PM -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote: > > At this point I'm rather reticent to even bother submitting anything to > > the "security officer" role as Warner has indicated that he's part of that > > role and will speak out against it in the name of security. I'm not a > > member of the inner circle, just a long-time user who saw some confusing > > behavior and thought that there was an opportunity to fix it. Warner's not the only member of the Security Officer Team. If you actually feel there is a problem, please write it up concisely. I have only seen vague arguments here (probably because I missed the beginning of the thread), and couldn't make a judgement. I'm sure others are in the same position. > I think you were quite right to, and I think you are right. > But you are fighting the forces of reaction here, in my view. > This whole thread has been a very depressing reflection on the > inability of any of the people arguing against you to make > any coherent argument against changing something to make sense. > > This is just conservative status-quoism gone mad. > > You are not alone in finding the current wording and behaviour > of this feature inconsistent, and initially incoherent. > > Perhaps we are just too dumb. Or perhaps there has been no effective case made for a change. Cheers, -- Jacques A. Vidrine http://www.nectar.cc/ NTT/Verio SME . FreeBSD UNIX . Heimdal Kerberos jvidrine@verio.net . nectar@FreeBSD.org . nectar@kth.se To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message