[Question] Questions about the BusyBox specification.
ibid.ag at gmail.com
Tue Jul 1 02:57:56 UTC 2014
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:26:27AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:06:07AM +0200, Frank Ihle wrote:
> > >> (6) Is there a (stateless/statefull) firewall for BusyBox ?
> > > think this is not related to busybox. Use iptables?
> The lack of an iptables command in Busybox is something that would be
> nice to fix, especially since the official iptables is bloated and
> (last I checked) requires dynamic linking. But this would still not be
> "a firewall for Busybox" (because Busybox is NOT AN OS), just an
> alternate implementation of the low-level firewall configuration tool.
At one point someone ported iptables to busybox.
However, that was in the busybox 1.00/1.1 era, so it's probably missing
several bugfixes and features, as well as having a lot of bitrot;
it also runs ~14000 lines and requires <rpc/rpc.h>.
The copyright notices say (C) 2000-2002.
(Rob Landley was not interested.)
I found it in this tarball:
by editing links from this mail:
On a rather unrelated note,
I'm wondering how some of the alternate firewalls compare.
More information about the busybox