Live data from Hacker News

PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

netgate.com

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#61
I was just banned from the pfSense subreddit for arguing about this change. https://i.imgur.com/1051KOl.png

My comments are visible here: https://i.imgur.com/8oZVSJO.png

Lovely. Due to this behaviour by pfSense employees I no longer want to use pfSense. Had no issues with the software and was considering purchasing their hardware.

Not any more.

archived view of the thread: https://archive.fo/pBoAY

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#62
Lots of bans going on over at /r/pfsense where users are asking straightforward questions and the staff are just banning them. Read the edits made to the posts there crazy....

Seeming more and more like this is a cash grab thing to get people to upgrade to their hardware.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#63
post #61

I was just banned from the pfSense subreddit for arguing about this change. https://i.imgur.com/1051KOl.png My comments are visible here: https://i.imgur.com/8oZVSJO.png Lovely. Due to this behaviour by pfSense employees I no longer want to use pfSense. Had no issues with the software and was considering purchasing their hardware. Not any more. archived view of the thread: https://archive.fo/pBoAY

I was also banned from the pfsense subreddit for same reason.

https://i.imgur.com/NR87PO6.png

Their employees are major tripping. I asked them a simple question, why do we need AES-NI hardware crypto if we don't use VPN's or anything that uses AES? And he refused to answer then banned.

Honestly I do not want to use it anymore and I shant be recommending it anymore to anyone.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#64
I have to say, the way that the pfense team is handling it, and the moderators over on reddit, while I had been considering using it, I think I'll use ubiquiti when I upgrade the network

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#65
post #39
post #23

This may be a good time to try a new relative open source product. OPNSense is a fork of PFSense with some philosophical and practical differences. Here are some notes on what and why https://docs.opnsense.org/fork/thefork.html

Are you saying that OPNsense doesn't care about AES side-channel attacks?

Would you please elaborate.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#66

I have to say, the way that the pfense team is handling it, and the moderators over on reddit, while I had been considering using it, I think I'll use ubiquiti when I upgrade the network

The angry pfSense team member just went through and deleted/removed all the comments involved in the thread he was arguing in.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#67
post #61

I was just banned from the pfSense subreddit for arguing about this change. https://i.imgur.com/1051KOl.png My comments are visible here: https://i.imgur.com/8oZVSJO.png Lovely. Due to this behaviour by pfSense employees I no longer want to use pfSense. Had no issues with the software and was considering purchasing their hardware. Not any more. archived view of the thread: https://archive.fo/pBoAY

No, you were incredibly rude to use and that's why you were banned. I suggest you share full screenshots if you're going to create drama.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#68
post #61

I was just banned from the pfSense subreddit for arguing about this change. https://i.imgur.com/1051KOl.png My comments are visible here: https://i.imgur.com/8oZVSJO.png Lovely. Due to this behaviour by pfSense employees I no longer want to use pfSense. Had no issues with the software and was considering purchasing their hardware. Not any more. archived view of the thread: https://archive.fo/pBoAY

No, you were incredibly rude to use and that's why you were banned. I suggest you share full screenshots if you're going to create drama.

I shared full screenshots of my own comments, except of the mod mail.

Here it is: https://i.imgur.com/FlF8E1Q.png

You deleted your own posts. This is the archive of some of them: https://archive.fo/pBoAY

I don't have an archive of the deeper posts, but they weren't particularly pleasant.

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#69
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. What is your reasoning? I don't really understand why you'd want to force people to upgrade HW when they don't need to.

They spelled out the reasoning in the post: “in order to support the increased cryptographic loads that we see as part of pfSense verison 2.5, pfSense Community Edition version 2.5 will include a requirement that the CPU supports AES-NI” You may disagree with that but it's intellectually dishonest to argue as if they didn't provide clear, technically defensible rationale, especially at a time when much of the industr…

[deleted]

Re: PfSense 2.5 and AES-NI

#70

Lots of bans going on over at /r/pfsense where users are asking straightforward questions and the staff are just banning them. Read the edits made to the posts there crazy.... Seeming more and more like this is a cash grab thing to get people to upgrade to their hardware.

You were banned because you violated rules. You were incredibly rude and then even threatened us. If that wasn't enough you attempted to start a brand new drama thread. "Cash grab thing" assertion proves we were right to ban you.
Post reply on HN