On 2013-02-19 11:45, Robert Fox wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 12:35 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
Le 19/02/2013 12:20, [email protected] a écrit :
> If that's how you feel about having a program like DenyHosts
running by
> default, do you feel the same way about having a firewall running
and
> configured out of the box.
>
> Is a firewall a sysadmin's or packager's choice?
A sysadmin choice. Pushing always more stuff 'by default' doesn't
help
users to make educated choices.
On one hand I agree, on the other hand - we want a distribution which
simply works and common choices are made (like which firewall) from
the
distro side - a good enough Sysadmin can then change to his/her
liking
afterwards. This is more or less a distro "philosophy" question, but
look why "Mint" has become so popular - because many choices are made
upfront for the user - yet the flexibility is in the system (and
enough
packages) for an advanced user to change them!
As long as the default settings are documented upfront - I see no
issue
in making such a decision on behalf of the "average" user - and
making a
more security robust distribution.
BTW, there is no Mageia package for BlockHosts - but fail2ban and
DenyHosts there are packages . . .
This is the point that many distro devs don't seem to understand.
People want a system that just works. Have you observed that Macs are
very popular with geeks, that is, the guys who can mess with a system in
and out. Why?
How did Ubuntu and Mint become so popular? That's right, they just
work. All the sane options have been pre-selected.
I once had a discussion with a dev who did not want to have the updates
manager's icon in the systray because he did not want to clutter that
part of the panel.
--
finid
