Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 08 Dec 2000 20:10:00 +0100
From:      mouss <usebsd@free.fr>
To:        Manfred Petz <pm@aber.warum.net>, "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com>
Cc:        Alexander Gavrilov <agv@haba.uven.ru>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: TIS Firewall Tookit
Message-ID:  <4.3.0.20001208200512.0577a150@pop.free.fr>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10012061544350.20839-100000@saturn.innonet.a t>
References:  <20001206081015.B61027@spawn.nectar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 15:50 06/12/00 +0100, Manfred Petz wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
>
>| Neither SOCKS nor delegate are firewall software.  The latter, in
>| particular, is probably one of the least secure pieces of proxy software
>| ever written.
>
>Accepted. Do you know a (free) alternative to FWTK which is comparable in
>terms of ease of use, straightforward source and which implements similar
>functionality (e.g. the permit/deny rules in netperm-table)?

the plug-gw, from the FWTK, is just far better than delegate!
don't let htto-gw and smap descrepancies make you conclude that
the whole thing is to throw away...

for smtp, smap approach breaks much things, and your best way is to
use a secure server instead. you can then put a plug-gw to only accept
mail that goes through this server...


cheers,
mouss




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.0.20001208200512.0577a150>