| 1 |
On 2006-02-04 13:12:06 +0000 (Sat, Feb), Graham Murray wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jon Mitchell <junk@×××××××.uk> writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > The current behaviour of a default Gentoo install is to load iptables |
| 5 |
> > after the network has been initialised. Upon shutting down likewise |
| 6 |
> > iptables is shutdown then the network interface. This strikes me as |
| 7 |
> > presenting a window of opportunity when the computer is exposed without |
| 8 |
> > iptables, albeit a small one. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Do people on this list think there is any value in re-arranging this |
| 11 |
> > order by default? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The problem with doing the other way is that iptables rules can |
| 14 |
> reference the specific interfaces to which the rule applies. This will |
| 15 |
> (AFAIK) fail if the interface does not exist when the rule is |
| 16 |
> created. Therefore iptables has to be started after the network. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
AFAIK that would not happen. |
| 19 |
You may set a rule for non-existing interface and iptables will not |
| 20 |
fail. If you do have two eth interfaces, try to set a rule for eth4 - |
| 21 |
you will see (I hope) no error. I saw none. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I would vote for starting firewall before network, having my humble |
| 24 |
opinion on that topic. :-) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
No virus found in this outgoing message. |
| 29 |
Checked by "grep -i virus $MESSAGE" |
| 30 |
Trust me. |
Archives