Re: security/firewall on Linux desktop at home - connection to the Intenet

ezeq device (in my case it > is quite old - DSL 2500U), but the question is *in general*. The question is > - which firewall > is recommended to be running on the Linux Desktop ? (let's say it is either > Fedora or Ubuntu). Do you rely on firewalld for Fedora and ufw of > Ubu

security/firewall on Linux desktop at home - connection to the Intenet

general*. The question is - which firewall is recommended to be running on the Linux Desktop ? (let's say it is either Fedora or Ubuntu). Do you rely on firewalld for Fedora and ufw of Ubuntu ? or do you recommend something else ? And regarding the Dlink router - do you recommend any other wir

Re: Linux firewall vs appliance

probably have multiple carriers through opposite ends of the building) and paying for just one link instead of two. Again, don't reinvent the wheel. > > >> 3. I would recommend an appropriately scaled firewall appliance >> > > There used to be a time where you could bu

Re: Linux firewall vs appliance

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Michael Tewner wrote: > 2011/1/24 Hetz Ben Hamo > >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering about the following scenario: >> >> I have 2 lines coming from 2 carriers, each line is 2 Gbit internet >> connection. They go to a r

Re: Linux firewall vs appliance

2011/1/24 Hetz Ben Hamo > Hi, > > I was wondering about the following scenario: > > I have 2 lines coming from 2 carriers, each line is 2 Gbit internet > connection. They go to a router, and then there should be a firewall.. > > Here I have 2 choices: > > 1.

Linux firewall vs appliance

Hi, I was wondering about the following scenario: I have 2 lines coming from 2 carriers, each line is 2 Gbit internet connection. They go to a router, and then there should be a firewall.. Here I have 2 choices: 1. Take a Cisco/Fortigate/Juniper/Whatever box, throw it in, configure it, and be

Re: firewall with real IP's

2010/10/18 Hetz Ben Hamo : > * What would you recommend as a good firewall (please, only the ones who are > being updated and have docs. ipcop for example has old documents and you > really need to "hunt" for some good instructions. Smoothwall is old [2007] > and it'

Re: firewall with real IP's

On Sunday, 17 בOctober 2010 19:55:43 Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: > * What would you recommend as a good firewall 1. In most cases, the firewall is really Linux kernel netfilter (iptables) > (please, only the ones who are being updated and have docs. ipcop for > example has old documents and y

firewall with real IP's

Hi people, At my business (hetz.biz) I'm using a small appliance as a firewall. It's doing the protection pretty well, has a web interface, easy to setup etc.. I'm thinking about using virtual appliance based on open source software (just for testing. I'm not going to let my cu

Re: question about a firewall

ter all. The amount of random port scans are huge). >>>> >>>> Assuming you understand iptables, and you know how to handle it right, >>>> there is no problem with that solution. None that I have noticed. >>>> >>>> Ez >>>> >

Re: question about a firewall

ing, after all. The amount of random port scans are huge). >>> >>> Assuming you understand iptables, and you know how to handle it right, >>> there is no problem with that solution. None that I have noticed. >>> >>> Ez >>> >>> 2010/9/3 Het

Re: question about a firewall

nt of random port scans are huge). >> >> Assuming you understand iptables, and you know how to handle it right, >> there is no problem with that solution. None that I have noticed. >> >> Ez >> >> 2010/9/3 Hetz Ben Hamo >> >>> Hi people, >>

Re: question about a firewall

olution. None that I have noticed. > > Ez > > 2010/9/3 Hetz Ben Hamo > >> Hi people, >> As I setup my VPS/dedicated hosting here in Israel, I have been asked by >> the hosting company (Netvision) to either buy and bring a firewall or rent >> from them since

Re: question about a firewall

(Netvision) to either buy and bring a firewall or rent > from them since the bandwidth I bought exceeds what is allowed under their > firewall. > They're offering Cisco 1383 (or 1838, I don't remember exactly which > model). > > As a person who really loves Linux, I thought t

Re: question about a firewall

On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 22:40 +0300, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: > Hi people, > As I setup my VPS/dedicated hosting here in Israel, I have been asked > by the hosting company (Netvision) to either buy and bring a firewall > or rent from them since the bandwidth I bought exceeds what is all

question about a firewall

Hi people, As I setup my VPS/dedicated hosting here in Israel, I have been asked by the hosting company (Netvision) to either buy and bring a firewall or rent from them since the bandwidth I bought exceeds what is allowed under their firewall. They're offering Cisco 1383 (or 1838, I don'

Re: Firestarter firewall problem

Looks OK. After you start the firewall, can you successfully ping an IP address? Try to ping your DNS servers: 194.90.1.5 and 212.143.212.143 If that works try to ping a domain name, i.e ping www.yahoo.com   David Ronkin wrote: Here we go: # iptables -t filter --line-numbers -nvL gives

Re: Firestarter firewall problem

David Ronkin wrote: This is second message - no suggestions on the below problem, pls help... Can you post the results of : $ sudo iptables -t filter --line-numbers -nvL OUTPUT and $ sudo iptables -t filter --line-numbers -nvL OUTBOUND (firestarter creates this chain) Especially the lines whic

Re: Firestarter firewall problem

gt; Can anyone advice on this strange issue: >> >> When i use "Firestarter" firewall in my Ubuntu it blocks me an outgoing >> traffic even though >> i've chosen "Permissive" setting by default for outgoing (for incoming one >> i allowed on

Re: Firestarter firewall problem

Ronkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Can anyone advice on this strange issue: > > When i use "Firestarter" firewall in my Ubuntu it blocks me an outgoing > traffic even though > i've chosen "Permissive" setting by default for outgoing (for incoming one

Firestarter firewall problem

Can anyone advice on this strange issue: When i use "Firestarter" firewall in my Ubuntu it blocks me an outgoing traffic even though i've chosen "Permissive" setting by default for outgoing (for incoming one i allowed only the remote machines i need to)? Thanks David -- בברכה, דוד רונקין

Re: parental control - outbound firewall?

On Tue, Sep 09, 2008, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote about "Re: parental control - outbound firewall?": > Hi Gabor, > > Filtering everything? what if your kids using Google to search for > things? Google will send them to web sites that you closed due to > too-much restriction? do

RE: parental control - outbound firewall?

think that any parental control can intercept and censor the content of a flash movie or game. > - Original Message - > Subject: RE: parental control - outbound firewall? > From: ronys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Gabor Szabo'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >

RE: parental control - outbound firewall?

the above initiative) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gabor Szabo Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:11 AM To: Israel Linux Mailing list Subject: parental control - outbound firewall? I have been using the Moreshet service since the days of Ac

Re: parental control - outbound firewall?

on the computer use by my children. First I thought setting up a proxy but I'd like to filter everything including chat and similar things and then allow services on a case base case. The latest idea I had was to configure a firewall on my the computer of my children to and let that filte

Re: parental control - outbound firewall?

case. > > The latest idea I had was to configure a firewall on my the computer > of my children to and let that filter the services and the sites. > > Any idea how to do that (using Ubuntu GNU/Linux). ? > > regards > Gabor > > ==

parental control - outbound firewall?

proxy but I'd like to filter everything including chat and similar things and then allow services on a case base case. The latest idea I had was to configure a firewall on my the computer of my children to and let that filter the services and the sites. Any idea how to do that (using Ubunt

Re: Multiculture in a single company? (was: Re: Linux firewall failover)

On 04/05/07, Omer Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 07:51 +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Omer Zak wrote: > > Why are you unifying all the Linux servers in one distribution? > > Won't this expose your organization's computers to the dangers of > > monoculture? > > (I didn't

Multiculture in a single company? (was: Re: Linux firewall failover)

ve to break in order to break > > into the organization's computers? > > > I think you are assuming two things: > 1. It is possible to set up the environment so that the attacker has to > break into ALL systems in order to gain access. The attacker usually has to brea

Re: Linux firewall failover

Omer Zak wrote: > Why are you unifying all the Linux servers in one distribution? > Won't this expose your organization's computers to the dangers of > monoculture? > I cannot talk for Amos, but here is my experience. The dangers of monoculture mostly apply when you have a group from which you w

Re: Linux firewall failover

On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 09:48 +1000, Amos Shapira wrote: > On 02/05/07, Imri Zvik ( Smile ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you do not limit yourself to Linux, you can easily use PF > (pf+pfsync+CARP) to do the job. > http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/carp.html > > Thanks for the

Re: Linux firewall failover

On 02/05/07, Imri Zvik ( Smile ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If you do not limit yourself to Linux, you can easily use PF (pf+pfsync+CARP) to do the job. http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/carp.html Thanks for the pointer. OpenBSD indeed is a formidable candidate for such stuff, but I'm trying hard

RE: Linux firewall failover

5:39 AM > To: Linux-IL > Subject: Linux firewall failover > > Hello, > > I'm looking at an option to deploy a couple of Linux boxes as our main > router for HA (after the power supply of our SonicWall fried itself on > the night of a non-working day). This morning I

Linux firewall failover

Hello, I'm looking at an option to deploy a couple of Linux boxes as our main router for HA (after the power supply of our SonicWall fried itself on the night of a non-working day). This morning I though it would be neat if the standby firewall node could replicate the connection tracking

Re: apache behind firewall

alery. > > Boaz. > > > > Valery. > > > > > > > A very powerful tool in your disposal, that's > for > > > sure. You can do magic > > > or raise havoc(...) with it. > > Ummm. I have root on both A and B, so I got a >

Re: apache behind firewall

A and B, so I got a simpler > way to raise havoc :) > > Valery > > > > Boaz. > > > Valery. > > > > > > > > > > > >> Try with caution - I'm not 100% sure of the > > above. > > >> Boaz. > > >> > >

Re: apache behind firewall

e havoc :) Valery > > Boaz. > > Valery. > > > > > > > >> Try with caution - I'm not 100% sure of the > above. > >> Boaz. > >> > >> > >>> Firewall allow only outgoing connection from A. > >>>

Re: apache behind firewall

Valery Reznic wrote: [ snip ] http://tldp.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO/forwarders.html I saw this link before. Or I don't understand how can I use this HOWTO or I don't explain myself plain :( . Let me try again. There is computer A, Firewall F, and ano

Re: apache behind firewall

--- Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Q1: what kind of firewall ? NAT ? direct ? stateless > ? stateful ? A1: no idea > Q2: what type ? (linux, router, bsd, cisco ...) A2: No idea. I just know, that all incoming connections are blocked. But never mind - ssh -R

Re: apache behind firewall

--- Boaz Rymland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 08:47:33AM -0700, Valery > Reznic wrote: > > --- Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Valery Reznic wrote: > > > > > > >

Re: apache behind firewall

Q1: what kind of firewall ? NAT ? direct ? stateless ? stateful ? Q2: what type ? (linux, router, bsd, cisco ...) Peter > _ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the mess

Re: apache behind firewall

On 13/03/07, Valery Reznic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO/forwarders.html I saw this link before. Or I don't understand how can I use this HOWTO or I don't explain myself plain :( . Let me try again. There is computer A, Firewall F, and a

Re: apache behind firewall

On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 08:47:33AM -0700, Valery Reznic wrote: > --- Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Valery Reznic wrote: > > > > > Good day. > > > > > > I have apache server behind firewall, which block

Re: apache behind firewall

--- Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Valery Reznic wrote: > > > Good day. > > > > I have apache server behind firewall, which block > all > > incoming connection and allow all outgoing and I'd > > like to access it f

Re: apache behind firewall

On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Valery Reznic wrote: Good day. I have apache server behind firewall, which block all incoming connection and allow all outgoing and I'd like to access it from outside Is it a way to access this apache server from outside ? (something like ssh's option -R )

apache behind firewall

Good day. I have apache server behind firewall, which block all incoming connection and allow all outgoing and I'd like to access it from outside Is it a way to access this apache server from outside ? (something like ssh's option -R

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

On 04/03/07, Shlomo Solomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what el

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Quoting Shachar Shemesh, from the post of Fri, 02 Mar: > > The real reason you are confused, however, is because the question is > not whether "kids should have access to pornography". The real question > is "whether all internet users in Israel be forced to identify > themselves via biometrics in

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

I agree, and that's exactly why I was he first one to menton the possible LINUX implicatons. But as I already wrote, only 2 other people referred to that aspect of the problem. All the other posts were about censorship, porn etc - and those subjects, as interesting as they may be, ARE off topic.

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

> This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or > three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this > completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who > knows what else. I disagree. If an MS-based solution is manda

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Shlomo Solomon wrote: This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what else. ENOUGH

enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what else. ENOUGH -- Shlomo Solomon http://the-solomons.n

RE: the great jerusalem firewall

_ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ori Idan Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 8:33 PM To: Yonah Russ Cc: Shachar Shemesh; Peter; IGLU Subject: Re: the great jerusalem firewall The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can s

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > Since the law is targeted at people under the age of eighteen, I > assume the commission will ask the question: Would I choose to show > that to a 17 year old? I am assuming you are right, which is exactly the reason I'm so worried. This is, precisely, the wrong question to ask

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: You are confusing a one to one relationship (surfer to voting center) with a one to many one (surfer vs. potentially an infinity or URLs). No- I 'm suggesting a 1-1 relationship of surfer to ISP proxy. Try to think this through please. You go to an inte

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually- I know one of the developers of the Estonian online voting > technology which identifies each voter based on a physical smart card and a > password. whi

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, > they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and emai

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yonah Russ wrote: > This law isn't stopping anyone who already legally has the right to > look at porn from looking at porn. Sure it does! For one thing, porn is not illegal today. I find it hard to believe that an adult is allowed to legally

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

that can actually be a good a argument for a bagatz in the unlikely event that this idiotic proposal will pass, that can hold off the implementation of this potential law for a few good months. On 3/2/07, Shlomo Solomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't want to get into a debate about porn. Th

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, > they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and email why not buy them an internet account f

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: Are you over 18? Type in your password and see whatever you want. Type your password WHERE in an Internet cafe ? And even if, what stops one to use https://www.the-cloak.com after that for free ? And one day after that is blocked https://some.where.els

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalition, which has passed hairier laws in the past, using the well-known quid pro quo arrangements with other coalition members from other parties. In this country the words 'don't worry only a few MKs voted for

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > This law isn't stopping anyone who already legally has the right to > look at porn from looking at porn. Sure it does! For one thing, porn is not illegal today. > It just requires them to prove that they have the right. Which is a way of stopping. Saying "you can't do X unless y

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and email why not buy them an internet account from an ISP that provides filtered service. I

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Are you over 18? Type in your password and see whatever you want. -Yonah On 3/3/07, Ori Idan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can see and what you can't see. The government should not decide for me what I can see or n

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Peleg Wasserman wrote: > The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from > religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the > people. No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalit

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can see and what you can't see. The government should not decide for me what I can see or not. -- Ori Idan On 3/3/07, Yonah Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yonah Russ wrote: > I don't think so at all- I just think that the laws in a democracy are > usually reasonably in line with the majority of the constituents. While "Majority rules" is a very important basis of democracy, it is very far from

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Peleg Wasserman wrote: The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the people. No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalition, which has passed hairier laws in the past, u

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the people. Second, while I do not agree with the way they decide speed limits (and I do enforce them every day), I see why a commission of experts can decide o

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > I don't think so at all- I just think that the laws in a democracy are > usually reasonably in line with the majority of the constituents. While "Majority rules" is a very important basis of democracy, it is very far from being the only one. Two others that come to mind are "Min

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/2/07, *Peter* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: You are of course assuming that the laws are perfect and consistent, and constant. The laws are made by a few people who think that they are in a position to judge for many, and who strongly

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/2/07, Peleg Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: First of all what do you consider pornography? What does that matter? There is a building full of elected officials and appointed commisions who will decide what is considered pornography after which

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

I know nearly nothing about taxation anyway (I come from one of the handicapped countries behind the Iron Curtain so I know more about five year planned disasters). I thought that I left that behind, but now it is catching up in the form of the great jerusalem firewall (there was considerable medi

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peleg Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: First of all what do you consider pornography? What does that matter? There is a building full of elected officials and appointed commisions who will decide what is considered pornography after which an entire system of judges will interpr

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Friday 02 March 2007, Shlomo Solomon wrote: > I don't want to get into a debate about porn. That's for each person to > decide. > > BUT, I do think that there are LINUX issues here too. What happens if the > law says you have to have a specific type of content filter and/or a > specific way of i

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

taxation anyway (I come from one of the handicapped countries behind the Iron Curtain so I know more about five year planned disasters). I thought that I left that behind, but now it is catching up in the form of the great jerusalem firewall (ther

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

First of all what do you consider pornography? Second, why is it the job of the government to tell it's citizens what is ok for them to access, and let their children see, and what isn't? While any parent who wants to limit his children's access to the Internet can do it quite easily, as can be do

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

If this country can tax a > $12k car into a 120k NIS car, they can tax porn users (and cigarette smokers > while they're at it). As you say, 'That's what people do now and it is less than effective'. More exactly: the great china firewall has helped arrest about 20 times

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

he ISPs for their work. If this country can tax a $12k car into a 120k NIS car, they can tax porn users (and cigarette smokers while they're at it). As you say, 'That's what people do now and it is less than effective'. More exactly: the great china firewall has helped arres

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. I am confused... is there any adul

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

I don't want to get into a debate about porn. That's for each person to decide. BUT, I do think that there are LINUX issues here too. What happens if the law says you have to have a specific type of content filter and/or a specific way of identification for those who DO want porn to be availabl

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... Yes, and you are confused because the people behind the law are inducing their own confusion on you. > is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access > pornography? First of all, yes. Personally, I see nothing wrong with a teenager knowing

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

* Yonah Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070302 12:54]: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. I'd rather take care of it myself and let the companies offer such a ser

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 12:44:32PM +0200, Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. Pornography is not the issue. My 8 year old son likes to go

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

El vie, 02-03-2007 a las 12:44 +0200, Yonah Russ escribió: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely > and easily access pornography? What about if they are?... > Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear > weapons. > -Yonah > > On 3/2/07, Peter <

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear weapons. I am confused... is there any adult in this country who wants to be fingerprinted t

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear weapons. -Yonah On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We (more exactly *you*) are about to join Iran, China and North Korea. A

the great jerusalem firewall

We (more exactly *you*) are about to join Iran, China and North Korea. Are you ready ? http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3371412,00.html Peter P. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscr

Re: voip and firewall

On 5/7/06, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 02:12:46PM +0300, Erez D wrote:> hi>> my company just installed a new firewall.> i had an ATA (grandstream handytone) that was connected via the internet to> asterisk at my home. >> this ATA do

voip and firewall

himy company just installed a new firewall.i had an ATA (grandstream handytone) that was connected via the internet to asterisk at my homethis ATA does not work anymore ( i can dial, but have no incoming audio, people can dial to me but it disconnects when i answer) this is due to the new firewall.

Re: firewall problem

Where are you pinging from? Be aware that locally-generated packets (e.g. pinging from the firewall) don't pass the NAT tables. Erez D wrote: but tcpdump both on ppp0 and on remote bbb.bbb.bbb.bbb gives: 10:35:27.564611 IP 192.168.0.254.5070 > bbb.bbb.bbb.bbb.5060: UDP, length 489

firewall problem

snat not working my local ip is aaa.aaa.aaa.aaa asterisk sitting on the internet at ip bbb.bbb.bbb.bbb my firewall's internal ip is 192.168.0.254 i did snat: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ppp0 -j SNAT --to aaa.aaa.aaa iptables -t nat -L -v gives: Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 23663 pac

RE: ed2k and firewall

also, if it's not the firewall, it may be that you're connecting to fake servers. razorback and the donkey servers are good. servers like sonny boy are run by feds, riaa, mpaa, and other evil entities in order to make ur downloading a little less easy (by having fake sources and s

Re: ed2k and firewall

your problem is definitely in firewall. Try turn the firewall off and reconnect/restart the client. The client should now get High Id and it means, that you should play with firewall rules. If you have no idea, what is High/Low Id, read the documentation. Very good source for mlDonkey user is mldonk

ed2k and firewall

to the FW. Note the 8th line in the status report included below. I've tryied "playing" with iptables to allow port 4662, but am obviously doing something wrong. I do know that the fact that edonkey claims the firewall is blocking sharing does noot always mean that is the case. But

Re: Old laptop is firewall, spindown the disk?

Did it: works great. Thanks. Yedidyah Bar-David wrote: On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 03:25:59PM +0300, David Harel wrote: Hi, I have this old laptop I turned into a firewall. It is only doing IP forwarding (NAT, MASQUERADING or whatever it takes) using iptables. I have 256MB ram on it. My idea is

Re: Old laptop is firewall, spindown the disk?

On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:48:53PM +0300, David Harel wrote: > Do you know if noflushd will eventually spin the disk up again if cache > becomes full? No, the disk will usually spin up automatically when needed. Very old or broken disks might not. -- Didi ==

Re: Old laptop is firewall, spindown the disk?

have this old laptop I turned into a firewall. It is only doing IP forwarding (NAT, MASQUERADING or whatever it takes) using iptables. I have 256MB ram on it. My idea is to have the disk spin down unless it is needed. Any idea? Mount root with noatime. Google

Re: Old laptop is firewall, spindown the disk?

Do you know if noflushd will eventually spin the disk up again if cache becomes full? Yedidyah Bar-David wrote: On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 03:25:59PM +0300, David Harel wrote: Hi, I have this old laptop I turned into a firewall. It is only doing IP forwarding (NAT, MASQUERADING or whatever

  1   2   3   4   >