Slashdot Mirror
SmoothWall 2.0 Linux-Based Firewall Released
thegraham writes "Despite some earlier server problems, SmoothWall 2.0 has been released this evening - there are also release notes available. SmoothWall is 'a firewall operating system distribution based on Linux, enabling a low-end, possibly otherwise redundant, Intel and compatible PC to become a hardened Internet firewall', and changes from version 1 include: 2.4 kernel, new web interface, improved networking and many bugs corrected through the Beta program."
Forgive me if this is an obvious question, but why run a dedicated "firewall operating system" when hardware and software firewalls are available?
I used to use smoothwall, but switched to the forked project IPCop. Some of the original developers forked away from smoothwall because of the founder's desire to mix open source with a business model that conflicted with the project. I was having problems with smoothwall and updates, which prompted me to switch to IPCop. I've been happy ever since.
Anyone else got opinions on Smoothwall vs. IPCop?
Ruby on Rails Screencast
Congratulations to all those who made Smoothwall's latest release possible.
:)
Based on personal experience, I highly recommend that anyone planning to use, donate to or purchase support for the Smoothwall product first research the company and primary members of the development team, such as founder Richard Morrell, before making a committment. Of course, that's a good idea under any circumstances, with any software product.
Personally, I use the Mitel SME Server distribution (formerly e-smith) for my needs, but the feature set is somewhat different and it may not be a good fit for you. The community of users supporting users, however, is a great assett to the SME server project.
Anyway, I didn't get the job with them, although I did find another *nix job much to my relief. I wouldn't use this myself though - IMO an experienced admin should take a minimal install of his favorite generic Linux/BSD distro, and build from there. Smoothwall is good for the less experienced though, who need an out of the box solution right now, not after 6 months googleing :-)
And I highly recommended it for many moons.
Unfortunately, the developers really annoyed me. One time, they released a patch that added a splash screen to the web interface that popped up EVERY time you changed page. And set chattr+i on the file on the server, then deleted the {ls,ch}attr commands on the server.
Which was just offensive. I went into their [community] IRC channel and mentioned how to fix it, and was kickbanned.
They make a big thing about being GPL and community-friendly, but in practice I just find them offensive.
I cannot highly enough recommend that people don't use this, and use ipcop instead.
Gary (-;
At work we have a Sonicwall SOHO 2 on a Windows network. It was in place before I got there. We "need" to keep it because we have a client that theoretically wants to come in and look at data on one server. They have yet to ever do this, and it isn't clear if it would even work (the VPN should work since it was tested when it was made, but the server's data is supposedly questionable from something one of the accountants told me).
The Sonicwall SOHO 2 serves its purpose in that it keeps out the worms and I can block/open ports.
But where it is truly awful is the detail of its logs. It will tell me the top IPs that got the most traffic - but it includes IPs that are outside of our network, and inside of our network. It will tell me the web URLs that get the most hits. And it tells me which protocols transmit the most data and how much that is.
But while that is nice in theory, it is largely useless.
I want to know what pages and what protocols specific inside IPs are doing. I want to know which inside computer is connecting to what outside computers over what protocols.
Also, if I block a protocol/port, it will still log all of the attempts towards it exactly the same as if it were being allowed in. It doesn't say that 1000 hits were attempted on it but didn't get in - it just says that there were N megs of data against it (apparently not through it).
I don't care about logging what they do - I'm pretty laid back about all of that. If they are doing naughty things, that is their deal (my superiors have yet to tell me otherwise).
But I do very much care if people have spyware or viruses on their systems - and a firewall is a great way to track down who has those issues. I can do it with what we have now, but it could be far easier.
I looked into Smoothwall and thought that it looked good - and it is free. Even then, I don't know if I can get money even to get a lowly machine to run as the firewall.
It isn't clear on their site how detailed the logs go.
And it isn't clear if I can mimic the same VPN processes that are in place now, with the Smoothwall system.
I would love to hear feedback about the software. That way I can make a more informed decision as to what to do about the overpriced SOHO (in order to use features on it, you continually have to pay to have them turned on, such as VPN or virus checking).
There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
I've been running a Soekris net4801 for a few weeks as a firewall. I'm very happy with it. It's not intended specifically as a firewall, you just buy the basic computer from Soekris and then install what you want. Getting it going can be quite involved, as it has no VGA circuitry; you have to administer everything over a serial cable. This is almost exactly the opposite target market from Smoothwall; the Soekris products are meant for people who know that the heck they're doing.
The 4801 I bought is a Pentium/266 with 128 megs of RAM, 3 network ports, a mini-IDE port (used for 2.5" hard drives [notebook style]), a compact flash port, a mini-PCI slot, and a 3.3v (only) regular PCI slot. This chipset has several known bugs, including a bad data-corruption bug with DMA mode hard drives that has not yet been worked around in Linux, to my knowledge. It's better to use it with a CF card (which can't do DMA) because of this, at least until they get that bug fixed. You can find some patches for the kernel via links off the main Soekris page, but I don't think there are any patches yet for the HD bug.
After about a week of futzing around with it, I finally got it running. Much of the pain was learning how PXE booting works. At this point, I have a Debian firewall with one external and two internal ports, and a 256MB internal "hard drive" (compact flash card). Everything is set up to log to RAM (instead of writing to the CF card, which is bad). The neatest part is that the machine is about the size of a trade paperback (it would be even smaller if they hadn't left room for a PCI card in the case), is absolutely silent, takes about ten watts of power, and has NO moving parts, so flinging it about isn't a problem. The chip is passively cooled, and doesn't even need a heat sink; the case gets mildly warm but never really gets hot. One of the neater gadgets I've played with recently.
Total net cost, including the CF card, was about $375, so it's not for the poor, and it's definitely not for the Smoothwall crowd. But if you're looking for a very sweet solution to the space-and-noise problem with a good, Linux-based firewall, this is a great solution.
As an aside, OpenBSD has patches to run with the net4801. I was having trouble getting OpenBSD's boot program to read the CF properly, and then suddenly ran short on time because my old P133 firewall started losing its hard drive. Pressed for time, I gave up on OpenBSD and installed Linux.... but, at least in theory, it should run well. OpenBSD also has support for hardware crypto accelerators, which you'll need if you want to do VPN with a box this slow. (that's one good use for the expansion slots.) I only saw one Linux hardware crypto driver, and it looked unfinished and primitive. Definitely a spot where OpenBSD looks to be ahead.
Nice little box. I'm very fond of mine.