Why use pfBlocker rules (auto-rules)?
-
@BBcan177 Perhaps its just me, but is it really worth it spending so much DEV time to develop/support/maintain the whole automatic rules option in the IP part of pfBlockerNG?
In my mind it:
1: Makes the package seriously complex in the UI for no real gain
2: More often than not “scre***” with your own rules order/strategy, and sorting is a chapter on its own.If the IP part of the package just provided the option to makes alias lists you could use in your own rules, the package would be SOO much more simple - and perhaps less prone to bugs/issues.
I get that it requires a little knowledge to create your own rules using the provided alias’es - But is it really that much simpler setting up auto rules in pfBlockerNG? (I have feeling that answer is a clear yes, and my issue is my own need of control and tidyness
).Just asking because I’m a HUGE fan of your package, and all the work you do for the community.
-
@keyser said in Why use pfBlocker rules (auto-rules)?:
the package would be SOO much more simple
I agree to be honest, I don't use auto rules - for one not a fan of auto any sort of auto rules that are dynamic.. A auto rule to make sure dhcp is allowed when you enable dhcp - I am ok with something like that, but be nice if you could show those in the gui for example..
I recall years ago suggesting that maybe fork the package into 2 where just a very advanced alias tool.. And those that wanted the auto rules feature could use that more complex package, etc.
There is for sure some fantastic work done with pfblocker - but I am not a user of any of the auto rules anything, just use to maintain fancy aliases ;) Which I use in my rules.
-
Or don't make them auto. Just create them once and then I can drag them around like I want. Probably the same work on your end though.
