Do you check /val/log/secure occasionally? I bet you'd find at least a couple of attempts.

I don't have that log - don't run a firewall.
When I get bored I'll put one up one day and see whats going on.

You're flirtin' with disaster, crashmeister, to not have at least Bastille running (if running is the right word, since Bastille is basically all scripts).

I'd personally like a front end for a Linux firewall that would be similar to ZoneAlarm on Windoze.

By the way, when I was using Micro$haft Windoze, ZoneAlarm would detect upwards of 4 NetBios scans a day on my dial-up account...

There are a lot more pings than you think there are out there. Most pings are echo pings from e-mail and forum feedback, but there are also some nasty things going on out there. Most NetBios port scans are automated attempts to locate people who unwittingly have file sharing enabled on their systems. They hit is with a copy of BackOrifice or something like it, and wah-lah, instant soldier in their DoS pinging army...

I just got done configuring up some firewall changes over the base setup the system install did. Did it through the console, because honestly, I havnt seen a gui for linux I like that gives me the kind of power the console does.

Actually, I had wanted to just FIND the actual physical file that ipchains was editing ... and edit it by hand. I usually prefer to do that, instead of using some obscure crazy command line tool =)

And I consider myself a newbie... yet I havnt broken linux yet by my evil anti-gui ways =)

If you look for something thats easy to configure - guarddog mightbe the way to go; looks real easy and also explains what your options do. Easiest firewall i know for linux anyway.
About flirting with disaster - I screw my box up on a regular basis or get bored and install something new anyway. Besides there is no important information in my box and i don't use it for relevant stuff like onlinebanking.

I wouldn't think about it that way at all. The OS maybe, but not the way that you manipulate it.

I'll bet that I can get most stuff done faster and more efficient with the CLI and a few bash scripts than you can with all of your GUI admin tools.

I would rather think of Windows as the Pinto and Linux as the S-class of OS'es since whether you use the CLI or GUI does not matter. The work gets done, and whatever you are more productive with should be your tool of choice.

Performance-wise, the CLI beats the GUI hands down, since you do not need X and a window manager to run commands from the shell prompt. With this in mind, I would lean more towards the GUI being the pinto, and the CLI being the S-class with all of its power and fast perfomance.

True - but setting up a bunch of firewallrules with gui wont kill your CPU. I hope.

Hehe, I guess that depends on what OS that you are using!

My oponion raised some dust, that's for sure.

but gui or not a firewall is a must for everyone, and not a so caled firewall that configures itself but a god firewall where you configure it .

willing or not that might be a gui or a command line, but in most linux cases it's based on ipchains, iptables.

And then is my question, why use al kind of tools to avoid learning the basic ruleset of iptables (ipchains), most of it is'nt that hard to understand and isn't learning how to use a linux right from the box whitout tools, and al other things on it, the basic goal of a linux user???

My opinion raised some dust, that's for sure.

but gui or not a firewall is a must for everyone, and not a so called firewall that configures itself but a god firewall where you configure it .

willing or not that might be a gui or a command line, but in most linux cases it's based on ipchains, iptables.

And then is my question, why use all kind of tools to avoid learning the basic rule-set of iptables (ipchains), most of it is'nt that hard to understand and isn't learning how to use a linux right from the box without tools, and all other things on it, the basic goal of a linux user???