Last I checked Dans Guardian was 500$ for a commercial license. If it comes down to it, the community can always pitch in and buy a license. I've spoken with someone from Dans Guardian in the past and they seemed very willing to help out.
Scott On 10/26/05, chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gary Buckmaster wrote: > > > Chris, > > The big problem there is that dansguardian is licensed to be free only for > non-commercial use. The same is true for DCC which is a component of > copfilter. There are alternatives to dansguardian such as squidguard and > urlfilter. Is there an alternative to DCC? > > > This means that while businesses are using these tools, they're using them > in violation of their license. I don't know how the authors of pfSense feel > about putting license encumbered packages together. > I think the users are totally unaware of the license encumbered components. > However if there are alternative components to the license encumbered > components then the features of the content filtering in copfilter are what > makes it so popular. On the main website of IPCop it now says that there > have been 2.5 million downloads of it in one year. I do not think that the > IPCop developers have measured to what extent the addons have popularized > the project. > > > > > > -Gary > > -----Original Message----- > From: chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 9:05 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] Re: Content Filtering > > Gary Buckmaster wrote: > > > Chris, > > I'm looking at the web page for copfilter and it's a decent enough looking > project, although it seems to be geared more towards virus and spam > filtering for email, and virus filtering of http traffic. Is that an > accurate statement? > Yes that would be an accurate statement. However the biggest issue with > IPcop and addons such as copfilter is that when IpCop is updated is breaks > the addon. > > If so, it will not do the same job that squid+squidGuard is accomplishing. > copfilter has further addons such as dansguardian . > which has the same function as squidguard. > > > > Also, since copfilter incorporates a few license-encumbered components > (i.e.: DCC) it would not be appropriate for businesses who want to use > pfSense. > I think that it is the features and functions of copfilter that make it so > popular, not necessarily particular components. I notice that its proponents > implement it in businesses rather than home users, so the content filtering > is more popular among business users where as squidguard, urlfilter and > dansguardian seem to be more popular among home users. > > > > > -Gary > > >
