From owner-freebsd-security Thu Jul 27 14:24:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AADF37C0EA for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:24:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billf@jade.chc-chimes.com) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 108A31C7A; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:24:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:24:10 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola To: Darren Reed Cc: Shawn Kelly , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw vs ipfilter Message-ID: <20000727172410.O51462@jade.chc-chimes.com> References: <20000726140337.10891.qmail@web5103.mail.yahoo.com> <200007271028.UAA14610@cairo.anu.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200007271028.UAA14610@cairo.anu.edu.au>; from avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au on Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 08:28:01PM +1000 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 08:28:01PM +1000, Darren Reed wrote: > > Is one better than the other? Why? Does it depend on the situation? > > ipfw is marginally better for freebsd because it supports all the > freebsd specific hacks - not that this buys you anything wonderful > in terms of filtering. ipfilter is generally considered to be the > "leading" public domain packet filtering package and I try to ensure > it stays that way :-) For example, the state tracking code in IP Filter > is still without an equal. If you are *serious* about your security > you wouldn't use ipfw (by serious I mean not for home/small company > use, where physical security is recognised, etc). Does ipfilter have rate limiting? -- Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc. billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message