Why E2guardian package is not Officially avaliable in Pfsense?



  • I wanted to try E2guardian. wondering why E2guardian is not official , is there any security complication? limitation ? bug?



  • @vallum said in Why E2guardian package is not Officially avaliable in Pfsense?:

    I wanted to try E2guardian. wondering why E2guardian is not official , is there any security complication? limitation ? bug?

    @marcelloc if you can give your feedback.



  • Hello Vallum,
    I´ve been testing the e2guardian package since December/18 and it's working fine.
    It's way better then squidguard, no doubts or comparisons.
    The package still has some small/cosmetic issues, most of them related to the LDAP search group/users and REstarting service mechanisms, but it's fully functional.
    I also made some security scans over the firewall after install it and it got nothing, so it looks safe at all.
    it worth to go ahead and try it. If you are still confused, consider create a Non-Production environment to test it until you get used to the GUI and processes.

    Not sure why pfsense team didn't consider the package so far. Maybe because is it still under-construction, but I do agree with you. That is a "must have" package for sure.

    hope that helps you.
    Fabricio.



  • @fabricioguzzy said in Why E2guardian package is not Officially avaliable in Pfsense?:

    Hello Vallum,
    I´ve been testing the e2guardian package since December/18 and it's working fine.
    It's way better then squidguard, no doubts or comparisons.
    The package still has some small/cosmetic issues, most of them related to the LDAP search group/users and REstarting service mechanisms, but it's fully functional.
    I also made some security scans over the firewall after install it and it got nothing, so it looks safe at all.
    it worth to go ahead and try it. If you are still confused, consider create a Non-Production environment to test it until you get used to the GUI and processes.

    Not sure why pfsense team didn't consider the package so far. Maybe because is it still under-construction, but I do agree with you. That is a "must have" package for sure.

    hope that helps you.
    Fabricio.

    Thanks Fabricio . I will test this.