Is Netplan acting like hidden malware?

[bushw]

Armbian uses Netplan by default to manage network settings. But when it uses  NetworkManager as renderer, it silently changes iptables rules—without asking, without telling.

 

*Neither Netplan nor NetworkManager are supposed to manage firewall settings.*

 

But they do it anyway, behind the scenes. That kind of behavior—making security changes without user consent—feels a lot like what malware does.

[laibsch]

please be more specific, what happened exactly?  where did you get that statement that netplan or networkmanager are not supposed to touch firewall settings?  when you bring a network interface up or down that can obviously affect firewall rules.

[Cancer]

fully agree with author statement. The same as change from ethx to endx is a step in wrong direction. Somebody was using windows too much. ifconfig is not even installed by default because of ip command. Distribution managers should be forced to stop such things.

@laibsch "when you bring a network interface up or down that can obviously affect firewall rules" Is it a joke? 

[laibsch]

this is not a vote but a technical discussion, @Cancer.  your hostile tone and unfounded accusations of "somebody was using windows too much" are out of place (and simply laughable).  consider yourself warned. 

 

and if you don't understand the technicalities maybe it's best to keep quiet?  and yes, of course bringing up or down a network interface can obviously affect the firewall.  and distribution managers are free to do whatever they want with their distribution, it is theirs not yours.  entitled much?  this is FOSS, you have the code, change it if you don't like it.  but otherwise, keep your entitled and ungrateful attitude to yourself.  thank you.

[robertoj]

XD

 

take your concerns to Canonical

[Cancer]

It's not about technicalities but basic logic. We have here situation where one program which should offer on/off functionality affects config of  another one.

@laibsch I'm not sure why have you reacted this way. Maybe i'm not proffessional but it's about linux and users should at least point on such things

@robertoj Naturally, it's not about armbian itself, but generally linux related. F.e. when i configure another samba instance usual way and find it's not working by looking in logs and finding after some lost time that interface name has changed. How many people are requesting isssue with samba and loosing time just because of that?

Edited 3 hours ago by Cancer

[laibsch]

  

16 minutes ago, Cancer said:

We have here situation where one program which should offer on/off functionality affects config of  another one.

 

I agree that would normally be a bug.  And Debian would agree and in turn us.  We have not established that being the case yet, though.  At least not for me since @bushw has not yet responded.  @Cancer Do you have an example for me to look into?

  

16 minutes ago, Cancer said:

when i configure another samba instance usual way and find it's not working by looking in logs and finding after some lost time that interface name has changed

 

Please do tell us more.

[MaxT]

How many people are requesting isssue with samba and loosing time just because of that?

I guess they are free to spend that time to develop own samba implementation