Gentoo Archives: gentoo-security

From: Frank Gruellich <frank@××××××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-security@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-security] firewall suggestions?
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:58:19
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-security] firewall suggestions? by Trevor Lauder
* Trevor Lauder <trevor@××××××××××.net>  8. Jan 04
> Ben Cressey said: > > [full quote sniped] > The post above is probably the most logical post on this subject to this > list so far.
That's your opinion.
> No one is slowing down the "net" or causing problems for other people > by using DROP instead of REJECT.
I have to wait for the timeout if I unfortunately send a request to you. You slow down me. Imagin one second please if there wouldn't be any ICMP3/3 in the whole net. Please think about this. And please drop a penny into the piggy bank for any reaching your server/gateway from outside.
> Calling people stupid because they don't follow your interpretation of > the RFC does nothing but lower your credibility on the subject.
So, what standards do we follow now? Anarchy on the net? Bind smtp to 80? That would give fun. And I give a damn shit that you have to config your MTA, this is my server, I do what I want with it.
> People might say that it is "polite" to send a reply back, but why > should I be polite to a uninvited and unwanted connection attempt on a > port that isn't even open?
Thank you for making clear, that you don't want to communicate. Thank you for making clear, that you are an egoistic fool. Thank you for making clear, that you want to be an unsocial punchy. Regards, Frank. -- Sigmentation fault -- gentoo-security@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
RE: [gentoo-security] firewall suggestions? Bob Crain <robert.crain@×××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-security] firewall suggestions? Keith Edmunds <keith@×××××××××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-security] firewall suggestions? Trevor Lauder <trevor@××××××××××.net>