Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables - Slackware

This is a discussion on Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables - Slackware ; Tom N wrote: > So we can't discuss configuring applications that come with Slackware > here? Perhaps you missed these, http://alcor.concordia.ca/topics/netnews/slrn/intro/ news.software.readers -- Two Ravens "...hit the squirrel..."...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 177

Thread: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

  1. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    Tom N wrote:

    > So we can't discuss configuring applications that come with Slackware
    > here?


    Perhaps you missed these,
    http://alcor.concordia.ca/topics/netnews/slrn/intro/
    news.software.readers
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

  2. Re: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

    Sylvain Robitaille says:

    >I'm a Slackware Snob (TM) ... that's the whole point of the project.


    Why don't you put together a French version of slackware? Of
    course, if you did, it would only work about half the time, and the
    rest of the time it would spend trying to **** other distros'
    wives...

    cordially, as always,

    rm
    --
    http://sports.jrank.org/pages/4065/R...lishments.html

  3. Re: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

    Tom Neilson says:
    >+Alan Hicks+ wrote:


    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
    >> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
    >> Ecclesiastes 7:5
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
    >>
    >> iD8DBQFHTJuSrZS6hX/gvjoRAmoKAJwJceHm3qiG+32idwlDNOrWVrxYbQCggm3/
    >> rbjA0ZuL9ePQ/vYCbAmspFg=
    >> =kdRX
    >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    >Good response Alan.


    Yep. Really enlightening. Noisy too...

    cordially, even to pure trash,

    rm

  4. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    andrew says:

    >There is a very /introductory/ section on slrn scoring on this
    >page:


    [slrn link deleted, mercifully]

    >which would get you started. It is well worth setting up and gives
    >you much greater control of your usenet experience IMHO.


    And you can learn, in totality, how 3 or 4 newsreaders work in less
    time than it takes to learn slrn's filtering system. Ah, but that's
    a feature for the CLI crowd!

    Mmmhmm, good! Says The Coward, pondering slrn as he shifts and
    squirms in his chair, adjusting, as he does it, the dildo jammed up
    his ass.

    Mmmhhmm, good!

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  5. Re: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

    andrew says:

    >Oops! Turn to page xxi of the 2nd edition of 'Slackware Linux
    >Essentials' and see who signed off the Preface.


    Did you actually buy that tripe? Why would you buy a book that was
    outdated before it was even written?

    You're totally pathetic, aren't you?

    Bugger off on out of here. You're not wanted. There is absolutely
    nothing in that book that needs reading be even the simplist of
    trolls posting to this group. Your purchase of same tells us that
    you are nothing more than boot-licking, ass-kissing, 2nd-rate trash.

    If there's enough room, perhaps you can park the trailer in The
    Coward's mom's backyard.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  6. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    Realto Margarino wrote:
    >buckboard.


    I actually had to look that up.

    slrn is to buckboard as trn is to...

    -Beej


  7. Re: slrn killfiles

    Tom N wrote:
    >Though I don't see how I can kill posts from people who change their
    >names like a whore changes her panties.


    The key is that it's easier for you to killfile them than it is for them
    to change logins.

    >Is there any way, do you know, of marking posts for deletion from
    >one's news spool? (I use slrnpull) Total deletion, so-to-speak?


    I've never used slrnpull, but if you check the man page (man slrnpull),
    there is a --kill-score option that seems promising.

    -Beej


  8. Re: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

    Realto Margarino wrote:

    > Why don't you put together a French version of slackware? ...

    (Bigotry deleted ...)

    Yawn ... Already done for a system I setup for someone else. It was
    easy to do, even ...

    --- /etc/profile.d/old/lang.csh.original 2004-02-15 23:02:26.000000000 -0500
    +++ /etc/profile.d/lang.csh 2007-01-14 15:04:36.000000000 -0500
    @@ -4,7 +4,10 @@
    # locale -a

    # en_US is the Slackware default locale:
    -setenv LANG en_US
    +#setenv LANG en_US
    +
    +# We want to use French Canadian
    +setenv LANG fr_CA

    # 'C' is the old Slackware (and UNIX) default, which is 127-bit
    # ASCII with a charmap setting of ANSI_X3.4-1968. These days,

    --- /etc/profile.d/old/lang.sh.original 2004-02-15 23:00:59.000000000 -0500
    +++ /etc/profile.d/lang.sh 2007-01-14 15:03:49.000000000 -0500
    @@ -4,7 +4,11 @@
    # locale -a

    # en_US is the Slackware default locale:
    -export LANG=en_US
    +#export LANG=en_US
    +
    +# We want to use French Canadian
    +export LANG=fr_CA
    +

    # 'C' is the old Slackware (and UNIX) default, which is 127-bit
    # ASCII with a charmap setting of ANSI_X3.4-1968. These days,

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Systems and Network analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  9. Re: [OT] Usenet improvements

    Tom N wrote:
    >Been thinking about this, Beej. Here's an idea:


    No offense (really!), but upon reading this sentence, I immediately
    thought, "This idea is rife with problems." (Usually I ask myself,
    "How would we enforce this in Nigeria?" Then I give up.)

    I don't mean to discourage you from thinking about these issues, because
    it's the only way to advance the art, but Usenet is a highly optimized
    solution to the problem it tries to solve. It has been decades in the
    making, with features advancing through trial and error by fire. You'll
    probably have to spend at least a month of full-time research to catch
    up to the state of the art and to understand the implications of changes
    to Usenet, especially the incredibly far-reaching changes you're
    proposing.

    Besides, people don't want it. Usenet is decentralized with a bare
    minimum of control, and that's the way we like it. We're on alt.* right
    now, a hierarchy that came into being largely because people were
    unhappy with the arguably minimal restrictions on the other hierarchies!

    "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
    --John Gilmore

    But this is all off-topic; it has nothing to do with Slackware. There
    are better groups for this discussion.

    Lots of good info and links here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

    -Beej


  10. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, Res wrote:
    >
    > On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Tom N wrote:
    >
    >> Have the people who run the newsservers maintain a database of names.
    >> Every name on the Usnenet would be unique. If someone had it before,
    >> then you can't use it.

    >
    > As a newsmaster


    You'll have to prove that. Until you do I'll assume it's bull****.

    > I can assure you that will not and can not work because
    > there is no central repository,


    I know that. But there easily could be.

    Or the equivalent.

    > not every news server carries every group,


    Which is irrelevant.

    > and those that do, dont have to aceept or propogate to anyone they dont
    > want to.


    Also irrelevant.

    >>
    >> Then, forbid people from using any name but the one they've been
    >> assigned.

    >
    > It is possible, its called a mailing list, which has a single 'command
    > point'


    What I've suggested is possible for the Usenet.

    >> Privacy is a good thing. A license to be juvenile delinquent punk is not.

    >
    > Those that feel the need to hide who they are, generally are not doing so
    > to avoid spam, its because, they are a ****ing wanker who want to cause
    > trouble.


    That appears to be true.

    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  11. Re: slrn killfiles

    Hey Beej,
    On 2007-12-01, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    > Tom N wrote:
    >>Though I don't see how I can kill posts from people who change their
    >>names like a whore changes her panties.

    >
    > The key is that it's easier for you to killfile them than it is for them
    > to change logins.


    I wasn't talking about logins, just changing the name in the From: header.

    >>Is there any way, do you know, of marking posts for deletion from
    >>one's news spool? (I use slrnpull) Total deletion, so-to-speak?

    >
    > I've never used slrnpull, but if you check the man page (man slrnpull),
    > there is a --kill-score option that seems promising.


    That just kills according to regular expressions. They can change their
    From: header and beat it.

    I'm not going to let the trolls force me into spending half my life
    messing with scorefiles.

    I'll just pay attention, and if I accidentally read one of their posts
    they'll never even know it.


    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  12. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, Two Ravens wrote:
    > Tom N wrote:
    >
    >> So we can't discuss configuring applications that come with Slackware
    >> here?

    >
    > Perhaps you missed these,
    > http://alcor.concordia.ca/topics/netnews/slrn/intro/
    > news.software.readers


    As near as I can tell, there is a newsgroup for almost every topic discussed
    on this group. If not, there are a dozen+ websites for each of them.


    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  13. Re: [OT] Usenet improvements

    On 2007-12-01, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    > Tom N wrote:
    >>Been thinking about this, Beej. Here's an idea:

    >
    > No offense (really!), but upon reading this sentence, I immediately
    > thought, "This idea is rife with problems." (Usually I ask myself,
    > "How would we enforce this in Nigeria?" Then I give up.)
    >
    > I don't mean to discourage you from thinking about these issues, because
    > it's the only way to advance the art, but Usenet is a highly optimized
    > solution to the problem it tries to solve. It has been decades in the
    > making, with features advancing through trial and error by fire. You'll
    > probably have to spend at least a month of full-time research to catch
    > up to the state of the art and to understand the implications of changes
    > to Usenet, especially the incredibly far-reaching changes you're
    > proposing.
    >
    > Besides, people don't want it. Usenet is decentralized with a bare
    > minimum of control, and that's the way we like it. We're on alt.* right
    > now, a hierarchy that came into being largely because people were
    > unhappy with the arguably minimal restrictions on the other hierarchies!
    >
    > "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
    > --John Gilmore
    >
    > But this is all off-topic; it has nothing to do with Slackware. There
    > are better groups for this discussion.
    >
    > Lots of good info and links here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet


    Thanks, Beej. You are right, of course.

    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  14. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, Helmut Hullen wrote:
    > Hallo, Tom,
    >
    > Du meintest am 01.12.07:
    >
    >> Is there any way, do you know, of marking posts for deletion from
    >> one's news spool? (I use slrnpull) Total deletion, so-to-speak?

    >
    > That's no slackware problem. In your case it's an slrn problem, and
    > there is at least one better fitting newsgroup for this problem.


    True, the centre of slrn is in news.software.readers where you would
    get a much better informed answer than I could give you :-) And my
    experience of slrn-pull is zero. Good time to be in n.s.r. as John E
    Davis is very active there at the moment.

    Andrew
    --
    "For the God who sings"
    http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/ftgws.html

  15. Re: Is This A Good Basic Firewall? -- Iptables

    On 2007-12-01, Realto Margarino wrote:
    > andrew says:
    >
    >>Oops! Turn to page xxi of the 2nd edition of 'Slackware Linux
    >>Essentials' and see who signed off the Preface.

    >
    > Did you actually buy that tripe? Why would you buy a book that was
    > outdated before it was even written?


    Actually no, I didn't buy it, I printed it from the Slackware DVD
    which makes me a bit of a cheapskate as well as a 'boot-licking,
    ass-kissing, 2nd rate ...' :-)

    > You're totally pathetic, aren't you?
    >
    > Bugger off on out of here. You're not wanted. There is absolutely
    > nothing in that book that needs reading be even the simplist of
    > trolls posting to this group. Your purchase of same tells us that
    > you are nothing more than boot-licking, ass-kissing, 2nd-rate trash.
    >
    > If there's enough room, perhaps you can park the trailer in The
    > Coward's mom's backyard.


    My best wishes to you,

    Andrew

    --
    "For the God who sings"
    http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/ftgws.html

  16. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, andrew wrote:
    ....

    > True, the centre of slrn is in news.software.readers where you would
    > get a much better informed answer than I could give you :-) And my
    > experience of slrn-pull is zero. Good time to be in n.s.r. as John E
    > Davis is very active there at the moment.


    Thank you Andrew.

    The thing is, that this is the only newsgroup I've ever even seen.
    And I am a bit afraid of wandering off into the rest of the Usenet.

    In my mind I see it as a big map with a little town marked on it
    called "alt.os.linux.slackware" and then a lot of unknown territory
    marked "Here There Be Dragons".

    :-)

    Guess I'll just have to grit my teeth and gird my loins and
    go for it.

    I suppose that all I have to do is put "news.software.readers" in
    my slrnpull.conf file.


    Tom


    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  17. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, Tom N wrote:
    > On 2007-12-01, andrew wrote:
    > ...
    >
    >> True, the centre of slrn is in news.software.readers where you would
    >> get a much better informed answer than I could give you :-) And my
    >> experience of slrn-pull is zero. Good time to be in n.s.r. as John E
    >> Davis is very active there at the moment.


    [...]

    > I suppose that all I have to do is put "news.software.readers" in
    > my slrnpull.conf file.


    At the risk of further enraging a.o.l.s. users can I ask your reason
    for using slrnpull, are you on dial-up or do you just prefer to do it
    that way?

    All the best,

    Andrew

    --
    "For the God who sings"
    http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/ftgws.html

  18. OT Slrnpull was: Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-01, andrew wrote:
    > On 2007-12-01, Tom N wrote:
    >> On 2007-12-01, andrew wrote:


    ....

    i> can I ask your reason
    > for using slrnpull, are you on dial-up or do you just prefer to do it
    > that way?


    I'm on dialup but I'll still use slrnpull when I move to a highspeed
    connection.

    I guess it's because you have more control. You are reading from a local
    spool rather than the server. All the articles are instantly available
    and you can delete any that you choose to.

    I'm working on a bash script that will remove posts from certain names
    listed in a file once a day with a cron job. By getting rid of posts
    from trolls (and just plain jerks) and responses to them, I'll keep
    the size of my newspool down and won't have to ignore those posts
    whenever I am reviewing a thread.

    I also post to slrnpull. So when I connect to the server, my new posts
    are uploaded and new articles are downloaded.

    So I can review my posts before sending them off.

    That's useful for a hothead like myself.

    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  19. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Tom N wrote:

    >> As a newsmaster

    >
    > You'll have to prove that. Until you do I'll assume it's bull****.


    I dont have to prove **** to you or any tosser on usenet, however, if you
    were a client of mine accessing usenet from my network, you'd soon
    find out how much of a BOFH i can be.



    >> I can assure you that will not and can not work because
    >> there is no central repository,

    >
    > I know that. But there easily could be.
    >
    > Or the equivalent.


    rubbish, and i find it funny that one who only recently found out what
    usenet is tries make these claims .. you clearly have a lot to learn,
    unless.... Dan was right and you are that lamer Allan Conor, you come
    accross as ignorant as him.


    >> not every news server carries every group,

    >
    > Which is irrelevant.


    certainly is, and when you discover whats actually behind usenet, you'll
    find out the answer yourself and realise what a wank you are for thinking
    it could be done.


    --
    Res

    mysql> use raddb;
    mysql> insert into auth (`Framed-IP-Address`) values('127.0.0.127') where
    user = 'troll'; quit;
    ~# radzap troll


  20. Re: Why Slackware? was ....

    On 2007-12-02, Res wrote:
    > On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Tom N wrote:
    >
    >>> As a newsmaster

    >>
    >> You'll have to prove that. Until you do I'll assume it's bull****.

    >
    > I dont have to prove **** to you or any tosser on usenet,


    You do if you want anyone with a functioning mind to believe you.

    I can't think of any reason why you'd even hesitate to do so.

    If it's the truth.

    Tom



+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast