[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
211–220 of 252 posts
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#212Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new major version offers a lot more functionality. I looked into it and decided I wanted it, so I upgraded. I assume that I could have stayed with the old major version but I'm not sure.
With High Sierra you couldn't, the previous version doesn't work on it.
3.8.2 works with High Sierra
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
you only need to pay every 3-5 years aaaaand only if you want to upgrade, aaaaaaand you can keep using your last updated version, aaaand only 50% of the full price
You can't, if you also want to upgrade your OS. v3 doesn't work on High Sierra.
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#215Nowadays it's more important to control and restrict outgoing connections than incoming connections. Who would had thought of that 25 years ago.
I've been saying for a long time that one thing that companies can do to meaningfully increase their security is to NOT install default routes on most machines.
Put in routes for your local networks and applications, set up a proxy server for any legitimate traffic that needs to "exit" the network (i.e., go to the Internet), and simply drop anything else.
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#216It's good to see another option for an outbound firewall, but as an industry we still have a long way to go. As with many security solutions, there is a conflict between flexibility and usability. I want:
1) To be able to choose the exact host/subnet/domain that an application can access with a good UX
2) Have someone else curate a list that I subscribe to that handles most cases
3) Work on desktop and mobile
For choosing the exact host/subnet/domain on a per-application basis, the best UX I've seen on any platform is FirewallIP[1], the unmaintained software on a jailbroken iPhone. So many desktop solutions[2] only let you choose Allow everything or Deny everything, Little Snitch and Windows 10 Firewall Control[3] are exceptions, but even they are limited.
The curated list option should be easy enough to support on most platforms. Easylist has shown how well it can work on the browser when combined with uBlock Origin. Install it for someone who is technically naive and they'll just see no ads with no negative experience.
The mobile platform is harder to support as under Android you need to root the phone to get access to the underlying iptables firewall with something like Afwall+, or you run a fake VPN back to the device and filter there which is prone to failure (is it working? has it stopped itself for some reason) and has less flexibility. Under unjailbroken IOS, products like Surge, Potatso2 and Shadowrocket run a local proxy that is similar to the fake VPN under Android, but requires manually editing a text file for configuration and seem to be designed to get around the Chinese internet restrictions rather than privacy.
[1] http://r-rill.net/FirewalliP7/FiPDepiction.html
[2] Glasswire on Windows, Douane and OpenSnitch on Linux, AFwall+ on Android
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://adguard.com/en/adguard-dns/overview.html
What if I let the user run it locally? I point a local dnscache at a local, customised "root.zone" that blocks all these EasyList ad server domains? User could have several alternate root.zones that provide different "profiles". To switch profiles simply switch root.zones. (I used to do this for myself. Then I stopped using caches altogether. Now I do everything with tinydns, cdb and a customized stub resolver.) Or w…
A good bunch of these resolve to AWS/cloudflare/etc. nowadays, so good luck with that.. :-/
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
My solution right now (on macOS) is Gas Mask[1] (a menubar hosts file manager) combined with some very nice hosts files[2]. It certainly kills of most of the pop-ups I run into. [1]: https://github.com/2ndalpha/gasmask [2]: https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts
I handle this for my whole network with a pi-hole[0]. [0] https://pi-hole.net
pi-hole is fantastic.
Plus, you get free ad blocking for most of the native apps on your mobile devices when using wifi at home or outdoors with VPN (haven't tested the latter yet).
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#219What I want for all these services (Little Snitch, ESET, etc) is an EasyList-like ... list. A community-aggregated and reviewed list of servers that don't merit my connection. I'd pay a monthly subscription fee for that. I'd also like separate lists for * "this wifi is public, be extra cautious" * "this wifi is public, be nice and don't torrent, do backups, etc" * "I'm on a metered connection (e.g. LTE), don't run to…
My solution right now (on macOS) is Gas Mask[1] (a menubar hosts file manager) combined with some very nice hosts files[2]. It certainly kills of most of the pop-ups I run into. [1]: https://github.com/2ndalpha/gasmask [2]: https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts
Do you load the hosts directly as a remote pointing to the raw file? Gas Mask is complaining about "unknown content" when I try that.
Re: LuLu: An open-source macOS firewall that blocks unknown outgoing connections
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone unfamiliair, what is weird about the choice?
The people who developed the creative commons licenses recommend against using them for software. [From their FAQ]( https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-comm... ): > We recommend against using Creative Commons licenses for software. Instead, we strongly encourage you to use one of the very good software licenses which are already available. We recommend considering licenses made available by the Fr…
That's because we treat software very differently from most other content subject to copyright.
As in this case, (reading the above threads) there's confusion as to the no commercial use clause extends to the content or the outcome of its processes. That is to say, NoCommercialUse for a book clearly means for derivative works. Nobody would ever suggest you can't read a book while in a commercial establishment. But in software we routinely place use restrictions on the end-user. Kind of bizarre, when you think about it.