Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 01:10:29 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Marc Silver <marcs@draenor.org> Cc: "Dan O'Connor" <dan@mostgraveconcern.com>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, brian@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: Firewall Rules Message-ID: <200005160010.BAA01357@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Marc Silver <marcs@draenor.org> of "Fri, 05 May 2000 09:01:28 %2B0200." <20000505090128.A4456@draenor.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Do you feel that userland ppp is as safe as the kernel firewalling
> options? I would like to gain a better understanding. What are the
> major differences between the two?
The only real difference is that ppp can filter packets based on
whether they will cause a connection attempt (the dial filter) and
can stop them from effecting the alive timer (the alive filter).
ipfw is much more powerful, but for the standard deny/permit stuff
that you're after, ppp is acceptable.
If you use ipfw with ppp and want to use (say) ``tun0'' in your
rules, make sure you run ppp with ``-unit 0'' to ensure that the two
are in sync.
[.....]
> Thanks,
> Marc
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>; <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !
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?200005160010.BAA01357>