From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Sep 11 15:58: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0935537B423 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 15:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 576971C6B; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:57:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:57:59 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: mi@aldan.algebra.com, Bill Moran , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: firewall rules for applications Message-ID: <20000911185759.W47559@jade.chc-chimes.com> References: <39BD5D43.9231594B@columbus.rr.com> <200009112246.SAA27038@misha.privatelabs.com> <20000911154915.X12231@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <20000911154915.X12231@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:49:15PM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:49:15PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > That's correct. And I'm trying to be one of those and think ahead to see > > the time when a giant software packages will be available to me on > > FreeBSD, but I'll want to limit their network access. > > UFS is getting ACLs, I don't know exactly what they will offer but > they might include branding that allows one to match the ACLs against > ipfw rules. It's reasonable to assume it can be done, but its only going to slow down ipfw even worse then it already is. -- Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc. billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message