Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:57:59 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: mi@aldan.algebra.com, Bill Moran <wmoran@columbus.rr.com>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: firewall rules for applications Message-ID: <20000911185759.W47559@jade.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <20000911154915.X12231@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:49:15PM -0700 References: <39BD5D43.9231594B@columbus.rr.com> <200009112246.SAA27038@misha.privatelabs.com> <20000911154915.X12231@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:49:15PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > That's correct. And I'm trying to be one of those and think ahead to see
> > the time when a giant software packages will be available to me on
> > FreeBSD, but I'll want to limit their network access.
>
> UFS is getting ACLs, I don't know exactly what they will offer but
> they might include branding that allows one to match the ACLs against
> ipfw rules.
It's reasonable to assume it can be done, but its only going to slow down
ipfw even worse then it already is.
--
Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc.
billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000911185759.W47559>