On 31/08/2011 17:41, Tom Eastep wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 16:05 +0100, Ed W wrote:
>> I think it's normal where we want to allow "mail" to allow all mail
>> protocols.
> I have mixed feelings about omnibus macros like this; I think they
> encourage naive users to open many more ports than are really needed.
>

There is an argument that for some naive users they can also *reduce*
the number of ports if big "recipe" macros are available, because if
it's not easy to figure out, then those naive users tend to open great
swathes of ports instead..?

I would argue that for this very specific situation (mail), there are
few modern mail servers that have security issues (even sendmail is
decent these days..), and I can think of really very situations where
you would want to open fewer than all of these ports, if you wanted to
allow mail either in or out.

Can anyone think of a real situation where it's worse than just
"neutral" that you open an extra "IMAPS" port where you only intended to
open IMAP? Or where it's useful to limit outbound clients to some subset
of pop/imap/smtp?

I guess I can think of a few corner cases, but none where it wouldn't be
fairly obvious that the "Mail" macro was the wrong choice?


Actually, tell you where I have seen this fail - I'm seen some wifi
hotspots that appear to want to *block* email, but they only remembered
to block half the ports... "Mail(REJECT)" as a rule is likely to be a
win for the naive user - I bet otherwise few would remember about
Submission/IMAPS/POPS...

Cheers

Ed W

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better 
price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
Shorewall-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to