Any ongoing effort to port /etc/rc.d/pf_boot, /etc/pf.boot.conf
from NetBSD ?
Ari Suutari
ari at suutari.iki.fi
Sun Jul 16 18:53:23 UTC 2006
Hi,
Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
> And to get rid of the "hole", you need to get the order right so there
> is nothing being exposed before the pf module is loaded. Once you have
> ensured that nothing gets exposed before rc.d/pf is started, it's
> trivial to make sure that that script only exits after pf has been
> enabled and the production ruleset is in place.
Too much tuning on security-related issue. The standard startup
sequence should be secure. I really cannot understand what there
is so bad on /etc/rc.d/pf_boot that it cannot be added to
FreeBSD as NetBSD & OpenBSD use it or something similar.
I'm not yelling after default block - others are and use it as
a reason not to use something like pf_boot.
> I think the chronological placement of rc.d/pf is already meant to
> achieve precisely that, have you actually checked the rc.d scripts and
> found some order that needs to be adjusted?
I could of course adjust my rc.d scripts, but I would very much
appreciate that security-related things are there correctly in
standard setup.
I'll try to port pf_boot myself if nobody else volunteers.
(I don't think there is much porting to do, however).
Ari S.
More information about the freebsd-security
mailing list