From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 16 21:05:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1DB16A4DA; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:05:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF0A43D45; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:05:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1F9E2085; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:05:27 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: 0.0/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on tim.des.no Received: from xps.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22892082; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:05:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: by xps.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9D17633C31; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:05:27 +0200 (CEST) From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Daniel Hartmeier References: <44B7715E.8050906@suutari.iki.fi> <20060714154729.GA8616@psconsult.nl> <44B7D8B8.3090403@suutari.iki.fi> <20060716182315.GC3240@insomnia.benzedrine.cx> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 23:05:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20060716182315.GC3240@insomnia.benzedrine.cx> (Daniel Hartmeier's message of "Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:23:15 +0200") Message-ID: <86y7utgt0o.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, Ari Suutari , freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any ongoing effort to port /etc/rc.d/pf_boot, /etc/pf.boot.conf from NetBSD ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:05:32 -0000 Daniel Hartmeier writes: > Hence, a "default block" switch or compile time option _within_ pf is > not going to make any difference. Sure it will, if pf is compiled into the kernel or loaded by the BTX loader. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no