On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 05:09:55PM -0700, Jim Kielman wrote:
>
> are more then adequate for the average user that is running any
> services. To answer your questions as to why they have to use a
> firewall, they don't, it's just something they did when they ran
> Windows, and they can't believe
On 10-08-31 08:21 AM, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 07:59 -0700, George Farris wrote:
>>
>> Gufw is in no way suitable for a new user. They have no idea what
>> iptables are or rules for that matter.
>>
>> George
>
> What is the actual use case for a simple and graphical firewa
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:21 +0200, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 07:59 -0700, George Farris wrote:
> >
> > Gufw is in no way suitable for a new user. They have no idea what
> > iptables are or rules for that matter.
> >
> > George
>
> What is the actual use case for a simple
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 07:59 -0700, George Farris wrote:
>
> Gufw is in no way suitable for a new user. They have no idea what
> iptables are or rules for that matter.
>
> George
What is the actual use case for a simple and graphical firewall? Why do
people who have no idea what iptables or rule
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 17:58 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, August 30, 2010 05:49:48 pm George Farris wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 14:20 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:22:40PM -0400, Greg Bair wrote:
> > > > On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrot
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 17:58 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, August 30, 2010 05:49:48 pm George Farris wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 14:20 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:22:40PM -0400, Greg Bair wrote:
> > > > On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrot
Hi,
I think firestarter is the best of it's kind. I've been using it for three
years and it always dowse the job. we better think in removing UFW than
firestarter
On 2010 8 31 00:59, "Scott Kitterman" wrote:
On Monday, August 30, 2010 05:49:48 pm George Farris wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 14:2
On Monday, August 30, 2010 05:49:48 pm George Farris wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 14:20 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:22:40PM -0400, Greg Bair wrote:
> > > On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > > > I was under the impression that Firestarter was no long
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 14:20 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:22:40PM -0400, Greg Bair wrote:
> > On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > >
> > > I was under the impression that Firestarter was no longer being
> > > maintained/developed. Wrong?
> > >
> > >
> >
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:22:40PM -0400, Greg Bair wrote:
> On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> >
> > I was under the impression that Firestarter was no longer being
> > maintained/developed. Wrong?
> >
> >
> Lastest stable, 1.0.3, was released in 2005, so I don't think so.
See th
On 08/29/2010 10:27 AM, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-29 at 11:42 +0200, Davyd McColl wrote:
>> I think perhaps we have different views on what constitutes
>> "maintenance". As libraries that Firestarter depends on progress,
>> someone will need to maintain the package to make sure th
On Sun, 2010-08-29 at 11:42 +0200, Davyd McColl wrote:
> I think perhaps we have different views on what constitutes
> "maintenance". As libraries that Firestarter depends on progress,
> someone will need to maintain the package to make sure that it
> installs correctly and works correctly. That's
>> If the answer is yes, then it does not need maintaining whilst
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UFW is also supported, there seems no need
to drop an application just because it has reached maturity and needs no
further 'tweaking' - Just my 2 cents worth.
I think perhaps we have different view
Hi,
Question: Does it work?
If the answer is yes, then it does not need *maintaining **whilst *
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UFW is also supported, there seems no need
to drop an application just because it has reached maturity and needs no
further 'tweaking' - Just my 2 cents worth.
*
*
***
On 08/28/2010 08:35 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:36:16PM +0200, Davyd McColl wrote:
>> I actually want to thank the OP for mentioning this project. It's an
>> easy-to-use, intuitive firewall manager for the masses that I didn't know
>> about. Personally, I hack together m
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 09:36:16PM +0200, Davyd McColl wrote:
> I actually want to thank the OP for mentioning this project. It's an
> easy-to-use, intuitive firewall manager for the masses that I didn't know
> about. Personally, I hack together my own scripts using iptables directly --
> but not e
I actually want to thank the OP for mentioning this project. It's an
easy-to-use, intuitive firewall manager for the masses that I didn't know
about. Personally, I hack together my own scripts using iptables directly --
but not everyone either can or wants to do this.
I'll be recommending this on
17 matches
Mail list logo
