From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthias Fischer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Guardian 2 Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 17:12:14 +0200 Message-ID: <43660c4e-e49d-8bac-f4da-26c3e19e2b94@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4780939142498689413==" List-Id: --===============4780939142498689413== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, you're not alone - I was a bit confused, too. Being curious, I did the following: Downloaded the newer tarball from here, hoping it would be the right one: http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/guardian-2.0-002.i586.tar.gz Downloaded the 'dependencies' from here: http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/packages/dependencies/i586/perl= -Net-IP-1.26-1.ipfire http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/packages/dependencies/i586/perl= -common-sense-3.74-1.ipfire http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/packages/dependencies/i586/perl= -inotify2-1.22-1.ipfire Unpacked the tarball and the three pakfire-archives and got it installed on my testmachine (offline). Hint: Take a 'close* look at the 'user:group'-rights. ;-) I don't know how Stefan created the 'tarball', but most of the files in it had 'samba:samba' assignments, even the symlinks (for these I used 'chown -h root:root' ...). The original archive looks like this: ... drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Jul 16 18:04 web [root(a)ipfiretest srv]# cd web [root(a)ipfiretest web]# ls -l total 4 drwxr-xr-x 3 samba samba 4096 Jul 4 11:03 ipfire [root(a)ipfiretest web]# cd ipfire [root(a)ipfiretest ipfire]# ls -l total 4 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jul 16 18:04 cgi-bin [root(a)ipfiretest ipfire]# cd cgi-bin/ [root(a)ipfiretest cgi-bin]# ls -l total 64 -rwxr-xr-x 1 samba samba 37174 Jul 14 14:51 guardian.cgi -rwxr-xr-x 1 samba samba 23201 Oct 22 2014 ids.cgi ... The whole thing is still offline, GUI seems to work, I can start/stop 'guardian' and edit the 'ignore'-list. But I'd like to hear something like "That was ok, go for it...", before I put this in production. ;-) HTH, Matthias On 16.07.2016 16:19, Mark Coolen wrote: > I'm a bit confused about that. Why would 2.0-002 be newer than 2.0-010? > There's a 2.0-012 under 'old approach' but those files have an older > timestamp. The 2.0-002 is a tarball, but the 2.0-010 is an ipfire package > as are the 'dependancies'. I've used Guardian 2 several times in the past > by just extracting according to the instructions on stevee's ;--) page, but > that doesn't seem to work with the 2.0-002 tarball. I just get a completely > blank page in the GUI. > How do we test? >=20 > On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Matthias Fischer < > matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote: >=20 >> Hi, >> >> Ok, next. >> >> Am I right assuming that the '2.0-002'-version at >> http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/ plus >> http://people.ipfire.org/~stevee/guardian-2.0/packages/dependencies/ is >> the latest!? >> >> Best, >> Matthias >> >> On 16.07.2016 04:03, Mark Coolen wrote: >> > I'm willing to test it as well. I take it the instructions from >> > http://planet.ipfire.org/post/introducing-guardian-2-0-for-ipfire are >> still >> > good? >> > >> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:23 PM, R. W. Rodolico >> wrote: >> > >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> Tell me what I need to do to test Guardian. I've never installed it, >> >> but I am doing it now. >> >> >> >> Rod >> >> >> >> On 07/15/2016 05:00 AM, Michael Tremer wrote: >> >> > Hi guys, >> >> > >> >> > even if you have a conversation on the phone, please try keeping us >> >> > in the loop. >> >> > >> >> > So the key points of what I know: >> >> > >> >> > * A release is targeted for core update 104 >> >> > >> >> > * There are a few changes required so that re-blocking a host after >> >> > it has been manually unblocked allows this host the configured >> >> > number of tries again and not only one. >> >> > >> >> > * Many more testers are required since feedback is really low at >> >> > this point. >> >> > >> >> > Did I get this right? What is the ETA for a set of patches on the >> >> > mailing list? >> >> > >> >> > What is the plan to engage more testers? >> >> > >> >> > Best, -Michael >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, 2016-07-14 at 14:36 +0200, Daniel Weism=C3=BCller wrote: >> >> >> Hi Stevee I know you are very busy and working hard on the this. >> >> >> But if you want to release the new Guardian 2 with Core 104 we >> >> >> still need to do some work and it must be tested! So please tell >> >> >> us something about the new guardian2 and the state of your work. >> >> >> >> >> >> Maybe we find more testers here on the list. >> >> >> >> >> >> Meanwhile I've talked with Michael about the state which I know >> >> >> of the guardian2 and we both go confirm that the list of blocked >> >> >> IPs which runs in the background isn't a good idea. Please let us >> >> >> talk by phone about it again. >> >> >> >> >> >> - Daniel >> >> >> >> - -- >> >> Rod Rodolico >> >> Daily Data, Inc. >> >> POB 140465 >> >> Dallas TX 75214-0465 >> >> 214.827.2170 >> >> http://www.dailydata.net >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) >> >> >> >> iEYEARECAAYFAleJfncACgkQuVY3UpYMlTQ1ywCfdXuAC8ByMYEOKBpkvV0R+BRm >> >> hhAAnR9juXlTjDlTiFMPbGOpDAP9LkOG >> >> =3D5XbU >> >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> >=20 >=20 --===============4780939142498689413==--