I agree, but it should be a bit easier to set your own balance between functionality and protection.
----- Original Message ----- From: "steve ide" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [Cooker] 9.0: firewall too strict > It's better a firewall strict than a sieve > remember when you install you can open your network to everyone. > > > J. Greenlees a �crit: > > > o beckles wrote: > > > >> How? > >> > >> I don't run Mandrake as a server and so all of the services are > >> unchecked. However, that setting also kills client apps so I have to > >> research the applications and their ports and key them in at the > >> bottom, which does not always work. > > > > > > actually, insert the lines opening the system for the apps at the top > > of the list. > > 1 it makes it easier to find when testing the settings > > 2 I beleive that the first configuration for a port overrides any > > subsequent configuration, so at the top the apps get through while at > > the bottom they don't > > > >> > >> > >> One example is rdesktop which is documented to only use one port but > >> adding that port/tcp and port/udp does not help any. > >> > >> To me that equates to a default setting of high when compared to > >> other firewalls programs. > >> > >> Ben Reser wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 09:10:27PM -0400, o beckles wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> Are there any plans to allow different levels of protection in the > >>>> firewall? Right now the iptables rules are too strict to function > >>>> properly on a windows network without manually adjusting the rules. > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Huh? You can adjust them however you want? > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
