Folks,
I've done a version for upstream fail2ban here:
https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban/pull/489
It includes optional application support (but not ports - adding ports
would removed the simplicity of ufw in a way).
Questions:
Is 1 a sane default for insertpos? I choose it because it is like
https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban/issues/455
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701522
Title:
integration with ufw
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad
Yes! It will be a killing feature!
But the dream variant would be if ufw can block per ports/application
also!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701522
Title:
integration with ufw
To m
** Changed in: fail2ban (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: fail2ban (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701522
Title:
in
** Attachment added: "ufw.conf"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701522/+attachment/1791210/+files/ufw.conf
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701522
Title:
integration with ufw
--
u
