Date: 08 Mar 2002 14:02:26 -0800 From: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net> To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: docs/35686: blackhole(4) page seems to contradict itself in WARNING Message-ID: <3ag03ag1l9.03a@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 35686
>Category: docs
>Synopsis: blackhole(4) page seems to contradict itself in WARNING
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Responsible: freebsd-doc
>State: open
>Quarter:
>Keywords:
>Date-Required:
>Class: doc-bug
>Submitter-Id: current-users
>Arrival-Date: Fri Mar 08 14:00:02 PST 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Gary W. Swearingen
>Release: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE i386
>Organization:
none
>Environment:
n/a
================
>Description:
The "warnings" section of the blackhole(4) man page has these two
statements:
In order to create a highly secure system, ipfw(8) should be used
for protection, not the blackhole feature.
This mechanism is not a substitute for securing a system. It should
be used together with other security mechanisms.
The first implies that blackhole shouldn't be used with, say, ipfw,
while the second implies that it should. It needs clarification.
================
>How-To-Repeat:
n/a
================
>Fix:
?
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3ag03ag1l9.03a>