From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Taylor, Grant" <gtaylor@riverviewtech.net>
Subject: Re: Possibility to lock iptables rules.
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:16:00 -0500
Message-ID: <4266D4A0.2000706@riverviewtech.net>
References: <1113994155.31280.29.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<20050420184753.GA25069@bender.817west.com>
	<20050420220123.GA25652@bender.817west.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050420220123.GA25652@bender.817west.com>
List-Id: <netfilter.vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </pipermail/netfilter>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
To: Jason Opperisano <opie@817west.com>
Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org

> after pondering this further (post-post, natch)...i had a thought 
> (yes--it hurt).  you could probably use SELinux to achieve this.  the
> minimal benefits that others have pointed out, and the overly complex
> nature of SELinux probably yields a pretty low benefit/cost ratio,
> though.

<smart a$$ comment>Want some ice?</smart a$$ comment>

Eh, the benefit / cost ratio might be low, but we are hackers and we do what we do for the challenge / fun / bragging rights of it.



Grant. . . .