Hi Graham, Graham Lyon a écrit : > Firewalls, for the average end user, should "just work". A great many linux > distros don't come with a firewall configured by default and there is no > default mechanism for interfacing with a firewall and opening ports etc for > any software to use.
The reason for this by the way, is that most Linux distros do not need a firewall at all. That is because unlike other systems, they are not insecure by default. I mean that most desktop distros do not have a number of useless and insecure daemons listening to the network by default. When ports are already closed by default then you obviously do not need the complexity of a firewall to "double-close" them! Sorry for ranting but I am a bit tired of the "everyone needs a firewall" bullshit. That is simply wrong (and probably pushed very hard by firewall vendors). Closer to the truth is: "everyone running a system insecure by default needs a firewall patch on top of it". So, while the average desktop Linux user simply does not need a firewall and is more than happy with the best firewall interface ever invented (= no firewall at all) *some* other users might need a firewall and would certainly find useful what you are suggesting. Good luck. Cheers, Marc PS: I have left for years a Windows 2000 system on-line without any firewall and without any problem. BUT I had explicitly disabled most network services beforehand. It was shamelessly far from easy to achieve, see for instance this: http://www.hsc.fr/ressources/breves/min_srv_res_win.en.html _______________________________________________ NetworkManager-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
