Developer comments
Due to a bug, the number of votes is not valid. It should be less than 100.
390
votes
|
|
460
0
70
|
|
|
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
Please edit your description, we've moved from google code to launchpad:
https://launchpad.net/gui-ufw
(and hey, someone already made a smartass comment. So early on!)
|
|
|
|
So Gufw is a frontend for ufw which is a frontend for iptables which is a frontend for netfilter?
|
|
|
|
Yes, as the website says :)
|
|
|
|
Actually, oops, I removed from the website. But if you know what iptables and netfilter are, chances are, you have no use for gufw.
|
|
asaz989
wrote on the 1 Jul 08 at 23:33
|
|
|
|
Honestly, if you want a graphical front-end, there's no reason it has to go through ufw (like Eldmannen said). E.g. firestarter or something. Although if gufw's GUI is more intuitive than firestarter's...
|
|
uaneme
wrote on the 2 Jul 08 at 08:29
|
|
|
+1
and also something like this in a Aptitude kinda GUI that works in a terminal window.
I like terminal access but i just can't get all those commands into my mind, for common task a GUI works better for me, and that way i get more memory space for commands that are less used.
This way you can help others more easy with finetuning their system without commandlines and their vunerability to tricky little mistakes (like closing port 12 instead of 21)
|
nand
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 2 Jul 08 at 13:52
|
|
|
Damn.
I removed a invalid duplicate link to a older 1100-votes idea, and it seems the number of votes here was not updated.
The real number of votes should be inferior to 100.
Sorry!
|
|
|
hi,dev@nand.
i dont believe the comment,actually people most of brainstormers have peculiar habit of voting the ideas which has postive votes not negative votes,even it is good one.so
that bug of 1000 votes created mess.i wasnt satisfied with my vote too and next consequence of these votes made brainstorm rank flicker.please be calm when editing brainstorm.
|
|
nand
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 3 Jul 08 at 16:20
|
|
|
For your information, the votes will be re-updated at the next update, when the bugfix will be uploaded.
Meanwhile, well..., we will have to live with this weird one :)
|
|
|
|
Console use should be use to a minimal admin-level functions. I totally agree there should be a way to enable/disable ufw through a UI... Trough some kind of integrated security section. Maybe adding a link to the UFG GUI in the Administration panel.
|
|
|
|
eureka!!!dev i found the original idea its IDEA#22
|
|
darrena
wrote on the 12 Jul 08 at 20:47
|
|
|
Some comments for everyone who recommended Firestarter:
1) Firestarter is dead upstream
2) Firestarter is per interface so you have to reconfigure it each time you switch between wired or wireless for example
A GUI really is needed for less experienced users, I don't know that it needs to be installed by default but it should at least be in Universe and hopefully main so people can install it easily.
|
|
|
I liked Firestarter since it provided a frontend to the maddening iptables, and I liked ufw for the same reasons. It didn't have to be a UI.
Now that I notice that the newest version was released in *2005*, I'll throw my support behind this. Configuring firewalls was made simple thanks to the CLI with ufw, but this makes it much less of a hassle.
*Sigh*...I still don't see the point...
|
|
Thelasko
wrote on the 28 Jul 08 at 16:20
|
|
|
"*Sigh*...I still don't see the point... "
Firestarter has some major issues with Samba, and seeing that it's dead upstream it's time to develop something new that works.
I've used GUFW and I must say it is superior to Firestarter.
|
|
|
Firestarter is a dead project.
Noob users need something simpler to turn the firewall on. ufw is simple for us, but not for the average joe user.
I support the idea of having Gufw by default in Ubuntu.
|
|
DrHalan
wrote on the 6 Sep 08 at 17:03
|
|
|
i would prefer a daemon that runs in the background and whenever some app wants to access a port a message box will pop up where you can allow or denie the access.
that would be really user friendly and safe :)
|
|
nand
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 20 Nov 08 at 17:03
|
|
|
Yep, missed this one!
Marking as "Already implemented" since this idea is a subset of http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/22/ which was marked as implemented for intrepid.
|
|
|
include GUFW into ubuntu 10.04
Its's a bug because it requires the command line in Ubuntu 9.10.
The command line is just the first bug report on launchpad.
|
Post your comment
|
