"Workstation" Product defaults to wide-open firewall

Bastien Nocera bnocera at redhat.com
Tue Dec 9 14:06:47 UTC 2014

----- Original Message -----
> Am 09.12.2014 um 14:32 schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> >> Am 09.12.2014 um 14:23 schrieb Bastien Nocera:
> >>> [1]: I haven't seen anything but arm-flailing on that issue. If somebody
> >>> wants to
> >>> go into details about what a server running inside the user's session
> >>> would
> >>> be
> >>> able to do that a client wouldn't be able to, feel free.
> >>
> >> you realize the difference between a open port found by a network scan
> >> in a public WLAN by any other client and a active outgoing connection to
> >> specific machines?
> >>
> >> you realize that a security relevant bug in a service available over the
> >> network may execute *any code* not intented by the running application
> >> at all?
> >
> > So the solution isn't to close ports, but not run services in contexts
> > where
> > it isn't safe to do so. This is what we implemented
> *boah*
> * you do not know what is running on a endusers machine
> * you do not know when soemthing is running why it is
> * you can not gurantee that just by a bug something won't run
> * you can guarantee *nothing at all*
> the only thing you can know is the default setup you ship

And the end user's responsibility is to know all that? To know the
implementation details of services, what ports they open, and why?
Maybe we should add "IP based network knowledge" to the install requirements
if you think that's the case.

And you're completely correct that we don't have bug free software or packaging.
Which is why, still on my TODO list, is integrating a regression suite to make
sure that services and applications don't start serving services when they shouldn't.
That's dependent on Taskotron being deployed which is why it wasn't already done.
You're more than welcome helping with that.

> if you think your responsibility ends with what you ship as defaults the
> you can't pretend you create a operating system at all
> call it appliance and anything the user does with or without
> understanding the possible impact is unsupported

It's not an appliance. You can get back your F20 configuration you so liked
with a single command-line. Which you know about. Which I wouldn't expect
any user to have to know to do the opposite.

More information about the devel mailing list