network/firewall under single user

[Andrew Farris]

Joe Smith wrote:
> Andrew Farris wrote:
>> ...
>> No, it should not start the firewall, service iptables start should 
>> start the firewall.
> 
> Sure, and it does, but is it a good design to make it easy to start the 
> network up without the firewall?
> 
> My memory is probably faulty, but I'm pretty sure I remember starting 
> the network in an older release and thinking, "Hey it started the 
> firewall too--that's a nice touch."
> 
> I suppose it doesn't much matter: as long as there's nothing running to 
> accept a network connection, nothing should be able to get in over the 
> net. Just the same, having the firewall in place would be that much better.

I never recall seeing that happen automatically, perhaps you changed runlevels 
and saw both turn on due to config for the runlevel.  In either case, I 
definitely would disagree if the suggestion was made to make that intended 
behavior: network start causes firewall start.  I think its much better to leave 
them isolated as is, and use runlevel configurations for what turns on.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul at gmail.com> www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0x8300BF29 fingerprint 071D FFE0 4CBC 13FC 7DEB  5BD5 5F89 8E1B 8300 BF29