On 8/26/19 9:07 AM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:

Well the thing is, blocknig ports tends to break applications that want to use those ports. We're not going to do that, period. It also doesn't really accomplish anything: either your app or service needs network access and you have whitelisted it (in which case the firewall provides no security), or it needs network access and you have not whitelisted it (in which case your firewall breaks your app/service). In no case does it increase your security without breaking your app, right? Unless you have malware installed (in which case, you have bigger problems than the firewall). Or unless you have a vulnerable network service installed that you don't want (in which case, uninstall it).

This is a reasonable point of view, until you notice Linux desktops evironments don't provide applications with a method to detect if they are running on a private network or not (See Windows Home, Office, Internet network settings).

Then a non technical user start Rythmbox, enable music sharing, and it works perfectly on their home network but then decides to buy a WAN card/USB stick and suddenly all the music is being shared to the world.

I wish NetworkManager could do something about these situations, maybe the default should be the public zone for interfaces that receive public IP addresses.


So if you want to change the firewall settings, you'd need to completely rethink how the firewall works. And nobody seems interested in doing that. We could e.g. have a list of apps th at are allowed network access, but then we'd need some form of attestation so apps can't impersonate each other. So only sandboxed (flatpaked) apps could use this hypothetical new firewall. And we surely don't want to have yes/no permission prompts, so we can't really ask the user "do you want your app to access the network?" (the user will almost always say yes). I'm not really sure what design would even work.

Avoiding unnecessary network services makes more sense.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:45 PM, Alexander Ploumistos <alex.ploumis...@gmail.com> wrote:
As a matter of fact, you did: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/3LHDQD5HCZMPV6O4LZRSKTVEIKEFJIBY/#3LHDQD5HCZMPV6O4LZRSKTVEIKEFJIBY https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/Release_Notes/sect-Products.html#idm225474210784


Thanks for dredging up these links!

Michael

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to