Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit
From: Kyler Laird (Kyler_at_news.Lairds.org)
Date: 04/27/03
- Next message: Shane Berringer: "Crypto containers with new Kernel"
- Previous message: Jem Berkes: "Re: Recent ptrace exploit effected by chroot?"
- In reply to: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Next in thread: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Reply: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 18:22:10 GMT
"Ginger Git" <gingergit@PleaseRemoveNOSPAM.> writes:
>but if the bridge has no IP address and therefore cannot be accessed remotly
>then there for it is secure!
So...you'd be willing to run *my* version of the bridge module?
If not, why? If it's not a potential source of weakness, you
should have no objections.
>What my point is - "If you cannot see the transpent Bridge you cannot attack
>it / reconfigure it etc" I am not talking about anything else. What part of
>that last line don't u understand??????? Would you like me to give you a
>lesson in Security?
Yes, please. I'll take the lesson on "covert channels."
--kyler
- Next message: Shane Berringer: "Crypto containers with new Kernel"
- Previous message: Jem Berkes: "Re: Recent ptrace exploit effected by chroot?"
- In reply to: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Next in thread: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Reply: Ginger Git: "Re: recommend Linux firewalls for non-profit"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|