full-disclosure - PIX vs CheckPoint

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3dc922c30406291912306737da@mail.gmail.com>
From: ostiguy at gmail.com (Matt Ostiguy)
Subject: PIX vs CheckPoint

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 16:57:42 -0700 (PDT), Gary E. Miller <gem@...lim.com> wrote:
> 

> I agree, except for one small problem.  Don't you still have to delete
> ALL the filter rules, and reenter them ALL to change the order of the
> rules? last I checked there was no "insert before", "insert at top" sort
> of options.  Just "insert at end".  This and other features can really
> slow down the otherwise decent CLI.
> 

PIX OS 6.2 (IIRC) introduced a feature for line editing: 

access list ostiguy line 15... should enter this line as line 15 in the acl.
no access list ostiguy line 12 should delete line 12 of the acl.


> Another bad thing about the PIX CLI is that is looks a lot like the IOS CLI,
> but has lots of subtle differences that will byte you when you least expect
> it.
> 
> RGDS
> GARY

I can't think of an instance where this is a bad thing, as generally,
the pix is more forgiving than IOS, as all the show commands work in a
PIXen's configuration mode.

ostiguy