DarkFoon wrote:
Is there anybody working on a package that does anti-vir scanning on
incoming internet packets?
Well, I am trying to get it done. My approach is to get snort and snortsam working with pf
first. Snortsam is a package that can add rules dynamically to variety of firewalls,
incl
Thank you very much
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Ullrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [pfSense-discussion] P2P Blocker
> On 6/6/06, DarkFoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I may have over looked it, but where in pfSense can you
There are some interesting packages coming up providing antivir functions:
- clamav
- clamsmtp
- havp
- p3scan
- viralator
Most of them are not usable yet as they are under developement but are making
progress. Check the packagesection in the webgui of your pfSense.
Holger
-Original Messag
Is there anybody working on a package that does
anti-vir scanning on incoming internet packets? I get the impression that
SonicWalls do it, and it'd be killer if PfSense (becaouse sonicWalls do not look
cheap) www.sonicwall.com
I remember some time ago somebody was working on
this with squ
On 6/6/06, DarkFoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I may have over looked it, but where in pfSense can you set the maximum
number of states a workstation can have? I like that idea for P2P blocking.
Firewall -> Rules -> Edit -> Advanced
I may have over looked it, but where in pfSense can you set the maximum
number of states a workstation can have? I like that idea for P2P blocking.
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Marquette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [pfSense-discus
===8<==Original message text===
> There were some threads on this in the forum also. I believe someone
> even went so far as to restrict the number of states individual
> workstations could have. Between castrating the bandwidth and
> castrating the amount of connection
On 6/6/06, Chris Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ah good idea, pfsense has Traffic Shaper in it.. I could play with
that and give P2Pa silly speed like 500 byte/sec heh.
There were some threads on this in the forum also. I believe someone
even went so far as to restrict the number of states i
> Give 'em 300 baud speeds. Bring them back to the BBS days :P
> Scott
hahaha yeah :P
ChrisN
On 6/6/06, Chris Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
===8<==Original message text===
>>
> How about Bandwidth Arbitrator? Works very well for us, and is GPL.
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/arbitrator/
> Kirk
===8<===End of original message text===
===8<==Original message text===
>>
> How about Bandwidth Arbitrator? Works very well for us, and is GPL.
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/arbitrator/
> Kirk
===8<===End of original message text===
Ah good idea, pfsense has Traffic Shaper in it.. I c
Kirk Ferguson wrote:
On 6/6/06, Gary Buckmaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there even a P2P blocking tool that's 1) effective 2) stable enough
for a firewall and 3) not encumbered by some draconian license. If
someone has a decent suggestion maybe a package can be made.
How about Bandwid
On 6/6/06, Gary Buckmaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there even a P2P blocking tool that's 1) effective 2) stable enough
for a firewall and 3) not encumbered by some draconian license. If
someone has a decent suggestion maybe a package can be made.
How about Bandwidth Arbitrator? Works
Matthew Lenz wrote:
Doesn't just about all P2P require some kind of port redirection or UPnP
on the firewall to allow any kind of uploading to occur?
No, almost all don't. Actually I can't think of any offhand that
require ports opened inbound. Even BitTorrent, which likes to have open
p
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Some firewalls have everything but the kitchen sink (and I'm not sure
if there aren't some who *do* have the kitchen sink...)
cheers,
Rainer
Is there even a P2P blocking tool that's 1) effective 2) stable enough
for a firewall and 3) not encumbered by some dracon
Doesn't just about all P2P require some kind of port redirection or UPnP
on the firewall to allow any kind of uploading to occur?
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 17:57 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just got another idea for pfsense :)
>
> I was wondering if you could add a Peer 2 Peer blo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Just got another idea for pfsense :)
I was wondering if you could add a Peer 2 Peer blocker?
I thought that removing the default-allow rule for the LAN was enough to
stop useful P2P.
What travels through your proxy or not is entirely not pfSense's busines
Hi all,
Just got another idea for pfsense :)
I was wondering if you could add a Peer 2 Peer blocker? Some
firewalls have it and thought it would be a great idea. Especially
for business's and home where there are lots of users.
Thanks and keep up the great work!
RRD Graphs are brilliant, thank
Sure. I posted on both the mailing lists because M0n0wall and PFsense are the
two projects I'm mainly interested in.
I've been playing successfully with both M0n0wall end PFsense:
I'm using m0n0 where all the features added in PFsense are not needed, because
I feel (note that this is my persona
Alle 17:00, martedì 6 giugno 2006, Holger Bauer ha scritto:
> There are some limitations of pfSense 1.0 that maybe don't apply to your
> setup (also just a quick shot from what comes to my mind at once):
>
> - The ftp-helper will only work at WAN when using multiwan/loadbalancing
OK
> - loadbalanci
Dejavu. I just saw this exact message on the m0n0wall with s/pfSense/m0n0wall/.
On 6/6/06, Odette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I need to substitute our production firewall, and I'd like to use PFsense
which I've already successfully used for home or small office environments.
The solut
There are some limitations of pfSense 1.0 that maybe don't apply to your setup
(also just a quick shot from what comes to my mind at once):
- The ftp-helper will only work at WAN when using multiwan/loadbalancing
- loadbalancing only works for connections running through pfSense (services
that r
Odette wrote:
I need to substitute our production firewall, and I'd like to use PFsense
which I've already successfully used for home or small office environments.
The solution I'm going to substitute is based on Linux-iptables which requires
more than 1000 rules. I need more than 25 static
.
>
> The solution I'm going to substitute is based on
> Linux-iptables which requires more than 1000 rules.
You have my deepest sympathies, it must be a nightmare to manage.
> Is there a rules number limit or a session number limit
> implemented in PFsense?
Nothing which isnt documented a
On 6/6/06, Odette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I need to substitute our production firewall, and I'd like to use PFsense
which I've already successfully used for home or small office environments.
The solution I'm going to substitute is based on Linux-iptables which requires
more than 10
Hi all,
I need to substitute our production firewall, and I'd like to use PFsense
which I've already successfully used for home or small office environments.
The solution I'm going to substitute is based on Linux-iptables which requires
more than 1000 rules. I need more than 25 static routes,
There is a ftp proxy listening at LAN by default to help ftp connections.
Disable it at interfaces>lan (it's called ftp-helper). Then add a firewall rule
that blocks or rejects protocol tcp, source IP any, sourceport any, destination
IP any, destinationport 21.
Holger
> -Original Message--
I am using the 1.0 beta 4 version and I want to block outgoing FTP from
the LAN to the WAN.
I don't succeed in blocking FTP and can anyone tell me why it is working
for other protocols to be blocked and not the FTP protocol.
begin:vcard
fn:Marcel Mutter
n:Mutter;Marcel
adr;dom:;;Lippestraat 1;Z
28 matches
Mail list logo
